The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh’s plea challenging the FIR lodged by the CBI against him in connection with the corruption charges leveled by former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah dismissed Deshmukh’s appeal against the July 22 order of the Bombay High Court, which had also turned down his prayer for quashing the FIR, saying no case for interference was made out. Is.
The apex court bench also dismissed the Maharashtra government’s plea against the high court’s order allowing a CBI probe.
Appearing for Deshmukh in his petition challenging the Bombay HC order, senior advocate Amit Desai argued that the CBI cannot investigate without the prior consent of the state. He argued that the HC had only ordered a preliminary inquiry, and subsequently had to seek state approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act before registering an FIR.
Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi, appearing for the CBI, opposed this and said that the investigation is based on the order of the High Court and the power of the Constitutional Court to order investigation cannot be taken away or curtailed.
The bench did not agree with Desai’s submissions and said insisting on sanction under the provision of the FIR could lead to the end of justice, in a situation where the court was compelled to order a CBI probe due to lack of confidence in the state police. have to be. “Why is the inquiry ordered earlier? Because the state cannot be trusted. If you say you still have to abide by 17A, it will defeat the goal of justice. The state government will never give approval. If the state had to approve, it would have probed the matter first,” Justice Chandrachud said.
Rejecting the Maharashtra government’s plea, Justice Chandrachud asked senior advocate Rahul Chitnis, appearing for the state, “Generally when an FIR is lodged, the police have all the relevant facts under section 167 of CrPC. has jurisdiction. The police is bound to take into account all the facts. How can we draw a line that CBI will only investigate misuse of law with respect to specific facts?
Justice Shah said the manner in which the posting was done is a matter of investigation.
The court also rejected the argument that the CBI would need his consent. It said, “If you talk of consent, it will defeat the direction passed by the Constitutional Court.”
.