A Mumbai court on Wednesday remanded the former Home Minister of Maharashtra Anil Deshmukh to 5-day custody with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with a corruption case. .Special CBI judge BC Barde pronounced the order remanding Deshmukh to CBI custody till April 11, 2022. .The CBI had registered a First Information Report (FIR) last yeasr against Deshmukh and unknown others on the basis of the findings in the preliminary enquiry initiated into the complaint of Dr. Jaishri Patil.The enquiry was initiated after a direction to that effect was issued on April 5, 2021 by the Bombay High Court in the plea filed by Param Bir Singh, former Commissioner of Mumbai Police.Special Public Prosecutor Rajmohan Chand argued on Wednesday that the enquiry revealed that Deshmukh was aware of the facts that:Assistant Police Inspector of Mumbai Sachin Waze had been reinstated into the police force after being out of service for more than 15 years; andhe was being entrusted with the most sensational and important cases of Mumbai.He submitted that post investigation Deshmukh stood named in the FIR along with personal secretary Sanjeev Palande, personal assistant Kundan Shinde and dismissed Mumbai Police cop Sachin Waze whose names were added later on.FIR was registered for offences punishable under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act) of the Prevention of Corruption Act)..SPP Chand also made the following submissions: - Deshmukh was targeting to collect about ₹1 crore per month from 1,700 bars in Mumbai and over ₹4 crores had been collected. - There are statements of Bar owners, and even a confessional statement of Sachin Waze that he was acting on instructions of Deshmukh.- Those statements have inconsistencies and to rectify those inconsistencies, custody of accused is required. - Accused is required to be confronted with the co-accused and additionally investigation is at crucial stage. - They have to utilise scientific interrogation tactics to conduct the investigation which is not available in Mumbai office but only in Delhi office. - That CBI approached a CBI court last week seeking custody and that application was allowed. But because there were two holidays in the middle, the agency could not get custody of Deshmukh. Subsequently, when they did apply on Monday, they were informed that Deshmukh had been transferred to the JJ hospital, without leave of the Court.In view of this, CBI sought for Deshmukh’s custody for 10 days. .Advocate Aniket Nikam for Deshmukh opposed the remand stating that calling an elderly persons ailment as misconduct was not right. He argued that instead of filing the FIR in Bombay, they filed in Delhi even though none of the alleged offences happened in Delhi and everything that was alleged in the FIR happened in Maharashtra.“What is so sweet about delhi! They are saying there are no special techniques here but only in Delhi, it is surprising,” Nikam argued. He also pointed out that Deshmukh had been interrogated by CBI for 2 days on April 21 and 22, 2021 extensively.Thereafter, despite writing to the agency and volunteering to co-operate with the investigation and making himself available for interrogation, Deshmukh was never interrogated. The CBI got permission to interrogate Deshmukh in judicial custody and they interrogated him for 3 days from March 2 to 4 this year and despite having been interrogated on 4 occasions, there was no custodial interrogation which was sought.He alleged that CBI’s custody was being sought only because Deshmukh’s bail application was due for hearing in High Court on April 8, 2022 in the money laundering case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate. He further submitted that Deshmukh was old and ailing, he had been adviced for shoulder surgery, hence it would not be correct to make him travel to Delhi for remand. "I have been available since April 2021, I have asked them but they choose to arrest me before April 8 hearing. All these reasons are phony and cosmetic. They have not followed rigours of 41 of CrPC. This court must refuse the remand," Nikam contended..SPP Chand replied that the accused cannot choose the place and time of investigation and the same is not prerogative of the accused. He also pointed out that the hospital has declared that Deshmukh is fit to travel and that all he required was physiotherapy.Nikam, however, responded stating that the discharge report of being fit did not mean he was fit to travel to Delhi and it only meant he could travel to jail from the hospital.
