Rashmi Shukla Has No Locus, Her Plea to Quash Phone Tapping FIR Not Maintainable : Maharashtra Govt to Bombay High Court
The affidavit by the state says that leak of secret information constitutes a cognizable offence, and the FIR ought not to be quashed.
The Maharashtra Government has sought to dismiss senior IPS officer Rashmi Shukla's quashing petition, saying that the FIR under the Official Secrets Act for the leak of her confidential report does not name her. Hence, she cannot challenge it. Shukla has "no locus," hence her petition is not maintainable, the affidavit filed by Rashmi Karandhikar, deputy commissioner of police...
The Maharashtra Government has sought to dismiss senior IPS officer Rashmi Shukla's quashing petition, saying that the FIR under the Official Secrets Act for the leak of her confidential report does not name her. Hence, she cannot challenge it.
Shukla has "no locus," hence her petition is not maintainable, the affidavit filed by Rashmi Karandhikar, deputy commissioner of police states.
Shukla's 2020 report (as head of the State Intelligence Department), pertains to phone interceptions that allegedly reveal corruption and political nexus in transfers and postings in the police force.
The senior officer's plea seeks to quash the Mumbai Police's March 26, 2021 FIR against unnamed persons following the leak. The FIR invoked the Indian Telegraph Act, Information Technology Act and Official Secrets Act, 1923.
The case was registered after opposition leader Devendra Fadnavis released details of Shukla's confidential report on national television in March.
The State claims that Shukla had marked the report as "top secret," therefore sections of the Official Secrets Act are invoked.
"Since the leak of secret information constitutes a cognizable offence, the FIR ought not to be quashed," the affidavit states.
The affidavit also denied the allegation that there was vendetta, malafides or illegality in transferring Shukla to Civil Defence last year after she had submitted a report to the then director-general of police Subodh Jaiswal on August 25, 2020.
Shukla, through her counsels, had alleged that she was made "scape goat" and had committed no offence alleged in the FIR. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani went a step further to say that even if she was the one who leaked the report, she would have acted in the "greatest public interest, in conformity with the preamble and provisions of the RTI Act and the supreme underlying principle of truth, justice and public interest."
He had claimed the FIR was registered just a day after then State chief secretary Sitaram Kunte gave a report saying that she had "admitted to her mistake" and being a woman no further step was taken.
The State denied her allegations that the police were trying to conduct a 'roving inquiry' by summoning her. "The Summons are so as to enable efficient investigation into the offences", said the 13-page affidavit. "It is denied that any investigation is directed against the petitioner," the affidavit added.
Dealing with Jethmalani's allegations that the phone taps had Kunte's sanction and he could not "disown" his role, the 13 page affidavit states that since Shukla herself acknowledges that the phone tap was in her official capacity, the permission is irrelevant to quashing of the FIR.
"The offence to be investigated is the leakage of information and has nothing to do with the contents of the information leaked," it said.
"Even assuming, without admitting, that the sanctions were validly received (for surveillance), I state and submit that the information received pursuant to such surveillance constitutes information contemplated under the Official Secrets Act and thus leakage of such information constitutes an offence," the affidavit stated.