Plea challenging the appointment of Subodh Jaiswal as CBI director baseless: from central government to HC


Plea challenging Subodh Jaiswal’s appointment as CBI director baseless: Central government at HC | YOF

The Central Government has opposed the retired CPA’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) contesting the appointment of Subodh Jaiswal as Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), saying he was “devoid grounded and based on assumptions”.

An affidavit was filed by Sanjay Kumar Chaurasia, Undersecretary of the Ministry of Personnel in response to the PIL by retired CPA Rajendrakumar Trivedi requesting the removal of Jaiswal on the grounds that he does not have experience in investigating anti-corruption cases and has questionable credibility. The PIL also questioned Jaiswal’s credibility as he headed a special investigative commission to investigate the fake and counterfeit stamp scam involving Abdul Karim Telgi and several police officials.

The central government’s affidavit states that the assertions raised in the petition “are unsubstantiated and based on assumptions and do not require the consideration of the Court as they bear no merit on the facts, and must therefore be rejected without no instructions from the start.”

Highlighting the legal provision followed by him to appoint a CBI Director, the affidavit argues that the appointing committee considers “all relevant factors, bearing in mind their overall suitability based on seniority , integrity, experience in investigative and anti-corruption work , recommends a panel of names, in order of seniority for the position of Director, CBI.

The affidavit also refutes allegations that Jaiswal did not work with the anti-corruption bureau. It states that a superintendent of police in a district is empowered to record and investigate offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (PC Act) and that this is part of his normal duties. “Nothing other than existing laws, rules and procedures is needed to investigate or oversee anti-corruption cases,” he said.

Jaiswal was SP of three districts, Commissioner of Police of Mumbai and Director General of Police of Maharashtra. “Therefore, it is erroneously claimed that Jaiswal has no experience in investigating and supervising anti-corruption cases,” the affidavit states.

In addition, anti-corruption cases are not limited to PC law, but also include economic crimes, white-collar crimes, corporate crimes, vigilance issues, etc., the affidavit adds. Further, Trivedi has misinterpreted the provision of the PC law where there is no requirement for a specialized wing of the investigative agency to investigate under said law. The provisions of the CP Act give the State Police the power to investigate offenses under the said Act and therefore this is also part of the routine mandate of the State Police.

(To receive our electronic document daily on WhatsApp, please click here. To receive it on Telegram, please click here. We allow sharing of the PDF of the document on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)


Comments are closed.