'Abuse Of Process' : CBI Seeks Dismissal Of Former Maharashtra HM Anil Deshmkuh's Plea To Quash FIR

The Central Bureau of Investigation has sought dismissal of a petition filed by former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh in Bombay High Court, saying that any relief to him would hamper the investigation which is at the preliminary stage and that his petition was "an abuse of process of law."

The CBI's reply affidavit has been filed against Deshmukh's petition, which challenges the FIR registered against him and unknown others under the Prevention of Corruption Act read with section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.

Deshmukh's petition says that the agency had not sought sanction to prosecute him as he was a public servant at the time when the alleged offence was committed. It also alleges that the case against him is biased, dubious and lodged with an ulterior motive "at the behest of those having political or other vendettas against him" and to have him arrested. It argues that no case of allegations of illegal gratification under section 7 of PCA is made out.

However, in its affidavit, the CBI has cited the Bombay High Court order to seek denial of any relief to Deshmukh, saying that there was no need to seek any sanction as the agency was acting on the basis of a constitutional court's order.

In an order passed on April 5, 2021, a division bench of Bombay HC had directed the CBI to conduct a Preliminary Enquiry into a complaint against Deshmukh and proceed "in accordance with law" based on the findings of the PE. That bench was hearing a clutch of PILs, including one by former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh. It, however, passed the order on an advocate Jaishri Patil's petition, who had also sent a complaint to a police station in Mumbai.

The CBI registered an FIR on April 21, 2021. The allegation against Deshmukh is that he had set a target of extortion for Sachin Waze, then Assistant Police Inspector with the Crime Investigation Unit of Mumbai Police, to collect money from bars, restaurants and/or other establishments in Mumbai.

The CBI affidavit also invokes the Maharashtra Government's petition against the agency where the State challenges the scope of the investigation. The challenge pertains to Deshmukh's alleged knowledge of now dismissed API, Waze's reinstatement into service and alleged intervention into police transfers/postings.

The CBI affidavit says, "State has in its Writ Petition, has, not challenged the filing of the FIR against the present petitioner but only sought to impugn certain parts of the FIR. Hence, State is neither making a grievance of lack of sanction nor claiming that no offence has been made against the then Minister."

The affidavit states that even those two aspects are an integral part of the investigation against Deshmukh and are a part of the complaint made by advocate Patil and former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh.

"It is submitted that the allegations levelled by Ms Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil against Sh. Anil Deshmukh is related to illegal gains, corruption, extortion, criminal conspiracy etc ,and it cannot be denied that the exercise of undue influence over transfer/posting of police officers by political executives may result in exercising undue influence over the performance of official duty by police officers. Thus, it is obvious that investigation into the transfer/posting of police officers is directly related to the allegations levelled by Sh. Param Bir Singh and Ms. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil," the affidavit says.

It then adds, "It is submitted that once during the course of after the culmination of the preliminary enquiry the commission of a cognizable offence emerges which are intrinsically connected with each other, the investigation must be made qua such offences without being inhibited by the initial PE." It argues that investigations against Deshmukh cannot be completed in a "fair and just manner" without looking into the posting of Waze and other police officers and report of, then State Intelligence Department Head, Rashmi Shukla.

The petition is likely to be heard on June 18.