Evidence Recorded In Special Enquiry Team Won't Be Relied Upon In Departmental Enquiry Against Sameer Wankhede: Delhi High Court Clarifies

The Delhi High Court has clarified that the evidence recorded in the Special Enquiry Team (SET) will not be relied upon in the departmental enquiry proposed to be held against Sameer Wankhede as per law in relation to the Cordelia cruise drugs case.

A division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Shalinder Kaur disposed of Wankhede's plea against an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on August 21 last year in so far as it refused to quash the findings of SET.

Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal held that NCB DGP Gyaneshwar Singh could not have been part of the inquiry team set up to probe alleged procedural lapses by Wankhede in connection with the case.

Wankhede had moved CAT challenging the report of the SET constituted by NCB's Competent Authority to enquire into the allegations levelled against him in the manner he conducted the raid on the cruise.

The CAT had observed that Gyaneshwar Singh, being actively involved in the investigation could not have been part of the SET, and directed that an opportunity for a hearing be given to Wankhede before taking any action.

The counsel appearing for Wankhede, on instructions, said that instead of pressing the plea, the bench may clarify that SET findings won't be used against Wankhede in the departmental enquiry proposed to be held against him.

“In the light of the aforesaid, the writ petition along with all accompanying applications is disposed of as not pressed by clarifying that the evidence recorded in the SET will not be relied upon in the departmental enquiry which may be held against the petitioner as per law,” the court said.

Recently, the court had partly allowed the appeal moved by the Central Government and modified the CAT's order. It set aside the direction of passing a reasoned and speaking order before any action is initiated against Sameer Wankhede on the basis of the enquiry report, after granting a personal hearing to him.

Previously, a single judge disposed of Wankhede's contempt plea alleging non-compliance with the Tribunal's order.

The single judge said that the petition was not maintainable but granted liberty to Wankhede to approach the CAT for redressal of his grievances.

Wankhede then filed a complaint against Singh before a Delhi Court, alleging that he harassed him during the enquiry conducted to probe the alleged procedural lapses by him in connection with the Cordelia cruise drugs case.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Viraj Dass, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Atul and Mr. Shadab Anwar, Advocates

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Kritiman Singh, CGSC with Mr. Varun Rajawat, Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, Ms. Vidhi Jain, Mr. Kartik Baijal and Mr. Shreya V. Mehra, Advocates for R-1 to 4; Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Ms. Astu Khandelwal and Mr. Yasharth Shukla, Advocates for R-5

Title: SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 300

Click Here To Read Order