'[Breaking] Uttarakhand High Court Directs CBI To Register FIR And Probe Corruption Allegations Against CM Trivendra Singh Rawat [Read Order]

The Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday (27th October) directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file an FIR and investigate the allegations of corruption levelled against Uttarakhand's Sitting Chief Minister Trivendra Singh Rawat by a journalist.The Bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani gave this Judgment in the matter wherein one Umesh Sharma (the owner of the local News Channel 'Samachar plus') had made a video (in July 2020) related to Rawat's alleged role of getting money transferred to accounts of his relatives in the year 2016 (as BJP's Jharkhand in-charge) to back the appointment of a person (AS Chauhan) in Jharkhand to head the Gau Seva Ayog.Matter before the Court [FIR No. 265 of 2020]Pursuant to this, one Dr. Harender Singh Rawat lodged an FIR against Umesh Sharma (The petitioner). The FIR [FIR No. 265 of 2020] was related to the matter wherein the Petitioner shared the above-mentioned news item/video (making allegations of corruption levelled against TSRCM).In the said news item/video, the Petitioner (Umesh Sharma) showed documents on a computer screen with certain bank accounts allegedly belonging to the respondent no.2/Informant (Dr Harender Singh Rawat) and his wife Smt. Savita Rawat.Uttarakhand High Court quoted folk songs (written and sung by Narendra Singh Negi)on #corruption while order CBI Investigation against Chief Minister Trivendra Singh Rawat@tsrawatbjp pic.twitter.com/H05H1sZkdl— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) October 28, 2020 The petitioner (Umesh Sharma) claimed that after demonetisation in the year 2016, money was deposited in the accounts of the informant (Dr Harender Singh Rawat) and his wife, which was meant as a bribe for TSRCM.In the video, the petitioner had also claimed that Smt. Savita Rawat is the real sister of the wife of TSRCM and TSRCM realized bribe money through deposits made in the bank accounts of the informant and his wife.Thereafter, a plea was moved by the Petitioner (Umesh Sharma) to quash this very FIR, which was registered against him in July 2020 [FIR No. 265 of 2020] by respondent no.2/Informant (Dr Harender Singh Rawat).Background of FIR No. 100 of 2018It may be noted that FIR No. 265 of 2020 was not the single case against the petitioner, in fact, many FIRs were registered against the Petitioner in past. But we would only focus on 'FIR No. 100 of 2018', which was also discussed by the Court in depth.[FIR No. 100 of 2018] - On 10.08.2018, the first informant lodged a report against the petitioner (Umesh Sharma) and four others, which was FIR No. 100 of 2018, under Sections 386, 388, 120B IPC, Police Station Rajpur, District Dehradun.In this FIR, a former employee of the News Channel Samachar Plus had alleged that Umesh Sharma, along with other people used to conduct sting operations and thereafter these people used to trap ministers and officers through spy camera.It was alleged that Umesh Sharma doesn't telecast news over his channel and under a pre-planned conspiracy he earns money by blackmailing them.Court's analysisIt was argued before the Court that in view of the settled legal position, if FIR No. 100 of 2018 and the instant FIR [FIR No. 265 of 2020] was with regard to same cognizance offence or with regard to offences which were committed in the same transaction, definitely the FIR No. 265 of 2020 should not have been registered.It may be noted that FIR No. 100 of 2018 was lodged broadly with the averments that he (an ex-employee of 'Samachar Plus') was threatened to conduct sting operation for the purposes of "blackmailing", "political instability" "cause disturbance and instability in the State" "bribe to instable the Government", "cause disturbance and violence in the State" etc.Significantly, the crux of FIR No. 100 of 2018 was that the Petitioner (Umesh Sharma) was involved in a conspiracy to destabilize the State Government and to cause disturbance and violence in the State. The word pre-planned conspiracy was also used in FIR No. 100 of 2018.Now, if we compare both the FIRs [FIR No. 100 of 2018 & FIR No. 265 of 2020], we would appreciate the fact that the acts are separate, for example, conducting sting through first informant (an ex-employee of 'Samachar Plus'), who filed FIR No. 100 of 2018 and levelling false allegations against the informant (Dr Harender Singh Rawat) by using social media publication (i.e., FIR No. 265 of 2020).However, the Court noted that in the larger umbrella, according to the State, there was a conspiracy against the State Government. This made the whole transaction one.In this context, the Court said that if the transaction was one, the Police could have investigated the matter of FIR of 2020 under the previous FIR as well [i.e., FIR No. 100 of 2018] and there was no need of registering another FIR [FIR No. 265 of 2020].In other words, the Court held that investigation into the allegations as levelled in the FIR of 2020 could have been investigated in FIR No. 100 of 2018 itself because they were allegedly part...

'[Breaking] Uttarakhand High Court Directs CBI To Register FIR And Probe Corruption Allegations Against CM Trivendra Singh Rawat [Read Order]

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

'[Breaking] Uttarakhand High Court Directs CBI To Register FIR And Probe Corruption Allegations Against CM Trivendra Singh Rawat [Read Order]

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers