[Pune phone tapping case] Bombay High Court grants interim protection to IPS officer Rashmi Shukla till March 25

The Bombay High Court on Friday granted ad-interim protection to IPS officer Rashmi Shukla in connection with the alleged phone tapping case of State Congress president Nana Patole during the tenure of previous BJP government [Rashmi Shukla v. State of Maharashtra]..Shukla approached the Court seeking quashing of the first information report (FIR) registered at Bund Garden police station in Pune city under Section 26 of Indian Telegraph Act on allegations of phone tapping. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani and Advocate Gunjan Mangla stated that the FIR was registered on a motivated complaint only with the intention to harass her. They sought prayer for no coercive action against Shukla assuring the Court that Shukla will extend her co-operation for investigation. Additional Public Prosecutor JP Yagnik opposed the grant of ad-interim, and sought some time to file reply to the petition. .A Bench of Justices SS Shinde and NR Borkar noted that they were prima facie convicted that Shukla deserves protection. They directed the Pune police to not take any coercive steps against Shukla in connection with the FIR. They recorded the following reasons for granting ad-interim relief:That there is a delay in registration of FIR;Though there are more officers involved in the process of obtaining sanction for the process of interception, only Shukla's name is mentioned in the FIR; andShukla is a high ranking officer holding the responsible post of Additional Director General of Central Reserve Police Force at Hyderabad. The Bench concluded that Shukla deserves protection forthwith and proceeded to grant protection till March 25, 2022..Shukla stated in her plea through advocate Sameer Nangre that she had been falsely implicated in the case and categorically denied that she ever committed any offence as alleged.She claimed that the FIR arose out of politically motivated complaint and was a clear abuse of process and an act of political vendetta to pressurize her.The delay in registration of the FIR was over 3 years and no explanation had been offered for the delay, her plea stated. She added that the allegations pertained to a period of 2016-18. She stated that the committee which was looking into allegations against her was presided by IPS officer Sanjay Pandey who was then the acting DGP of the State. However, since this charge was inappropriately held by him, the validity of the committee stood vitiated. .On these grounds, Shukla sought quashing of the FIR. Pending the hearing, Shukla also sought a stay on the investigation. .[Read order]