Lowdown on how feud at the top unfolded

The feud now playing out in public between the two top officers of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), its director Alok Verma and special director Rakesh Asthana, first came into the public domain in October last year when the former tried to stall the latter’s promotion to his current post, although it had been simmering even before Verma took over as the chief of the federal investigation agency on February 1, 2017. Hindustan Times chronicles key developments in the bitter saga, which on Tuesday entered what seems to be the end game when Asthana approached the Delhi high court against the filing of a bribery case against him by the agency .

In his petition, Asthana sought a directive from the high court that no coercive action be taken against him. On the same day, the agency presented before special CBI judge Santosh Snehi Mann, deputy superintendent of police Devendra Kumar, arrested in connection with the bribery case against Asthana. It claimed that Kumar, who was arrested on Monday, was part of an extortion racket being run in the garb of an investigation.

Asthana has accused Verma of attempting to induct tainted officers into the agency and interfering in investigations carried out under his supervision and made a formal complaint to the cabinet secretary. The cabinet secretary has asked the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to look into his representation.

CBI, in a formal statement on September 21, said the special director was being probed in six different cases being investigated by the agency. On Sunday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told CBI chief, Verma, to “let the law take its own course” when the latter briefed him on the allegations against Asthana, an official familiar with the development said on Monday. CBI expanded its probe into the case on Monday by A public feud between its top two officers has rocked the Central Bureau of Investigation, which has seen a few other controversies in the past In 2013, the Supreme Court called the CBI a “caged parrot”. Justice RM Lodha said there was clear evidence of interference in a CBI inquiry into alleged irregularities in coal blocks allocation. The remark came amid the Opposition’s criticism that the government was using the agency to cover up wrongdoinginthe case. “It’s a sordid saga that there are many masters and one parrot,” the court said. It added that the agency “must know how to stand up against all pulls and pressures” In November 2014, the then CBI chief, Ranjit Sinha, was directed by the Supreme Court to recuse himself from a probe into the 2G scam. The court issued the directions following a PIL that stated that Sinha abused his official position and met accused in many cases at his residence. The top court asked former CBI special director ML Sharma to look into charges against Sinha. Following Sharma’s report, the CBI was asked to register a criminal case against Sinha. The investigation against Sinha is yet to be completed

arresting Kumar. Investigators are preparing to question two supervisory officers — one of superintendent of police rank and the other of inspector general — in the case.

The agency will also seek a clarification from a senior intelligence official who investigators suspect may have been acting in his “individual capacity”. “Director Verma separately met national security adviser Ajit Doval too,” said the CBI official cited above. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Prime Minister’s Office did not offer any comment on the meeting. But a senior official confirmed that the PM met the CBI chief. The CBI official said Verma was likely to recommend the suspension and immediate repatria- Ranjit Sinha’s predecessor in the Central Bureau of Investigation, AP Singh was accused by the investigating agency in 2017 of abusing his official position. It was alleged that controversial meat exporter Moin Qureshi was taking money for

“settling” Central Bureau of Investigation cases against people by claiming his proximity to Singh. One of the businessmen who allegedly paid money to Qureshi was Sana Satish Babu, who is now a complainant against Rakesh Asthana

tion of Asthana to his parent cadre of Gujarat in a day or two. The bribery case against Asthana has been registered on a complaint by a Hyderabad-based businessman, Sana Satish Babu, who alleged that two Dubai-based brothers — Manoj Prasad and Somesh Prasad — claimed that they were acting on behalf of the CBI special director and allegedly struck a deal for ~ 5 crore to protect him (Babu) in a case that the agency registered against controversial meat exporter Moin Qureshi last year.

Former CBI director AP Singh is also an accused in the case. Two months before the registration of the case, Asthana complained to cabinet secretary Pradeep Sinha that it was Verma who asked him in February to call off the ques- The dilution of a lookout circular (LoC) against beleaguered tycoon Vijay Mallya from “block” to “inform” allowed his escape on March 2, 2016. In October 2015, the LoC was issued against Mallya on the request of the Central Bureau of Investigation in a bank loan default. Immigration authorities were asked to stop Mallya from leaving the country, but the agency later downgraded the LoC. Mallya remains in the UK since leaving the country and investigating agencies are trying to secure his extradition In Sept 2016, former director general of corporate affairs BK Bansal and his son committed suicide in their house. Before their suicides, Bansal’s daughter and wife, too, killed themselves after the registration of a bribery case against the official. Bansal and his son wrote suicide notes in which they accused some Central Bureau of Investigation officials, including a deputy inspector general-level officer of threatening and misbehaving with them. It is still not known whether the CBI investigated charges levelled by the Bansals

tioning of the Hyderabad-based businessman.

Asthana alleged that Satish Babu was being protected by Verma under a ~ 2 crore deal. The cabinet secretary forwarded this complaint to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). Asthana cited nine other instances in which he alleged that Verma and agency joint director Arun Kumar Sharma were trying to interfere in investigations with ulterior motives.

CBI has formally denied the charges against Verma and Sharma.

The agency has now named Satish Babu as a witness in the case against Qureshi. Asthana wrote to the CVC that he recommended Satish Babu’s arrest in the case in September . After the The Central Bureau of Investigation’s then special director and frontrunner for the director’s post, RK Dutta, was transferred only two days before the then Central Bureau of Investigation chief Anil Sinha was to retire in December, 2016. Dutta was shunted out to make way for Rakesh Asthana’s appointment as acting director. Asthana was only an additional director. “A note had gone to CVC that I was to be shifted from CBI to the home ministry and CVC just followed the course. CVC was supposed to look into the reasons of my shifting,” Dutta said recently registration of the FIR against Asthana, CBI arrested the alleged middleman in the case, Manoj Prasad, who is in the agency’s custody.

On Monday, CBI named Kumar as an accused in the case on charges of fabricating records. Kumar was the designated investigation officer in the case against Qureshi.The agency, in a formal statement, said:

“The matter relates to the creation of a statement under section 161 (Criminal Procedure Code) of Shri Satish Sana, a witness in Moin Qureshi case, showing it to be recorded on September 26, 2018 at Delhi.

During the investigation, it has been found that Shri Sana was not present in Delhi on that day and was in Hyderabad.”

The Enforcement Directorate (ED), which investigates violations of foreign exchange rules, on Tuesday filed formal money laundering charges in a case involving pharmaceutical company Sterling Biotech that formed the genesis of the fight between Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) chief Alok Verma and his deputy Rakesh Asthana.

According to the ED, the group has defrauded banks to the tune ~ 8,100 crore after taking loans from their domestic as well as foreign branches. Group promoters, brothers Nitin and Chetan Sandesara, are now on the run. The ED is initiating action under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act against the Sandesara brothers.

The group’s premises were raided by the income tax department in 2011 and during searches a diary containing details of payments made by group executives to various bureaucrats and companies was recovered. Some of the payments were made to tax officers, too. The IT department handed over the case to the CBI for further action under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the ED was roped in to probe money laundering charges.

One of the diary entries was construed as payment made to Asthana, now special director in the CBI, and it was denoted “RA”. In October last year. CBI director Verma tried to stall Asthana’s promotion as special director on the basis of the diary entries, but the move failed.

In a later probe, the CBI found evidence that the “RA” stood for a running account which the company had with another firm. Asthana has alleged that the CBI deliberately kept the evidence that could have exonerated him under the wraps. The ED said cash to the tune of Rs 140 crore was withdrawn from the shell companies and used to bribe “public servants”.

The whereabouts of the promoters are not known to the investigating agencies.

NEW DELHI: NEW DELHI: