Court verdict may not end uncertainty in CBI
Officials wary of taking call on big cases as it may be construed ‘policy decision’
NEWDELHI: The Supreme Court’s (SC) conditional reinstatement of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) chief Alok Verma, who was divested of his powers on the intervening night of October 23 and 24, means various things for various stakeholders:
ALOK VERMA
While Alok Verma will be back in the saddle as the director of CBI on Wednesday, his wings have been clipped by the Supreme Court.
The top court has said that he will not take any policy decisions till the high-powered committee of the Prime Minister, Chief Justice of India and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha meet and take a call on the preliminary inquiry conducted by the Central Vigilance Commission against him on the basis of allegations levelled by his deputy Rakesh Asthana. The court has fixed a week’s time for the committee to meet and decide on action against Verma.
This means, Verma will not be able undertake any new initiative, order a new investigation or take major decisions. He will carry out only ongoing routine functions as CBI director, but if the high-powered committee decides to throw out all the charges against him, he will start functioning as a regular director and might seek an extension in his tenure — for at least the time he has lost because of the government order. Verma’s tenure formally ends on January 31.
CBI
The period of uncertainty at the agency — apart from Verma, his deputy Asthana, with whom he was engaged in an internecine battle that roiled the agency, was also removed — is unlikely to end soon. Although Verma has been reinstated, he has also been asked to perform only routine functions “without any fresh initiative, having no major policy or institutional implications”. After Verma’s removal, interim director M Nageswara Rao was asked by SC to refrain from taking any major policy decisions.
CBI officials are wary of taking any call on a big case as it may be construed as a “policy decision”. CBI officials said that under Rao as interim director, the agency undertook a move to outline the key functions of the CBI director to the court and understanding which among them would fall under the “major policy decision” criteria; almost 17 such functions were identified, but the idea was dropped, they add.
RAFALE CASE
Although a complaint regarding the deal is pending with CBI, Verma is unlikely to launch a so-called preliminary enquiry because the Supreme Court has said the deal is above board and any such enquiry will need government permission (which may not be forthcoming), or be construed as a policy decision. CBI officials point out that Rao has steered clear of launching new enquiries simply because of this.
RAKESH ASTHANA
The fate of CBI special director Asthana hangs in limbo. The SC has not decided on Asthana’s petition challenging the government’s move to divest him of his powers . His battle will continue in the Delhi high court, where he has filed a petition for quashing the CBI’s FIR against him. The HC has reserved its order. If the order is his favour, he too can be reinstated by government. But there is no bar on the government reinstating him even before the HC pronounces its order. When Verma was at the helm in the agency, the CBI formally stated that Asthana was under the scanner in at least half-a-dozen cases but under interim director M Nageswara Rao, the agency clarified that there was only one FIR pending against him.
THE PERIOD OF UNCERTAINTY AT THE AGENCY — APART FROM VERMA, HIS DEPUTY ASTHANA, WITH WHOM HE WAS ENGAGED IN AN INTERNECINE BATTLE THAT ROILED THE AGENCY, WAS ALSO REMOVED — IS UNLIKELY TO END SOON
SELECTION COMMITTEE
The committee comprises the Prime Minister, The Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition.
There is a possibility that chief justice Ranjan Gogoi may not participate in the proceedings since he has heard Verma’s petition and instead, under the rules, nominate a sitting SC judge to attend the meeting of the selection committee. The committee will rule against Verma if it finds enough material on record and subsequently recommend criminal or departmental proceedings against him. Alternatively, it could throw out all allegations against him. It could also seek a further probe.
Although the court has asked the committee to meet within a week, it can’t force a decision, and it’s entirely possible that the committee’s meetings remain inconclusive till Verma retires.