CBI Deputy SP AK Bassi, the former probe officer in the alleged corruption case against Special Director Rakesh Asthana, has claimed that he was being subjected to intimidation and veiled threats by the present Investigating Officer and made a “scapegoat and victimised” for discharging his duties of filing the FIR pertaining to corruption case against Asthana.
Bassi moved the Supreme Court on Tuesday against his transfer to Andaman and Nicobar Islands. In his plea, Bassi alleged that his transfer on October 24 is “mala fide and derails a sensitive probe” and added that allegations against Asthana are “grave”.
A Bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi and Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph said, “The court will look into urgent listing of the plea” after advocate Sunil Fernandes sought listing of the petition on November 2.
“Bassi bears a reasonable apprehension that he and his team members and senior officers would be implicated in the same,” the plea said.
“The manner of transfer showed vindictiveness because the fact that the name of Asthana and Joint Director Sai Manohar were cropping up in the false statement of Sana. The applicant herein is being subjected to intimidation and veiled threats by the present Investigating Officer,” it said.
The plea claimed that Manohar was handpicked because as soon Asthana became interim chief of CBI in December 2016, he handed over the Policy Division to the Junior Joint Director Manohar.
“Asthana is the main reason why extension was given to Manohar in spite of objections from the CBI Director. Now Sai Manohar is advising and driving the investigation of this case and trying to frame the entire investigation team for doing their job honestly and sincerely,” it said.
The plea alleged that the all pervasive manipulations and machinations inside the CBI to save some select officers from their misdeeds and penalise officers like Bassi for conscientiously carrying out their duties, have forced him to move the top court.
“It is instructive to note that all the officers who were a part of the investigation of the aforementioned FIR against Asthana and Kumar were summarily transferred without any valid or cogent reason,” it said.
Meanwhile, the apex court on Tuesday directed the Hyderabad Police to provide adequate security to businessman Satish Sana, complainant in the alleged bribery case against Asthana.
A bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph refused to stay the CBI summons against Sana and also rejected his plea for recording of his statement in the presence of retired SC judge AK Patnaik who is monitoring the CVC probe against CBI Director Alok Verma.
Sana had moved the SC on Monday seeking police protection and a stay on the notice issued by the CBI summoning him for interrogation.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing Sana, told the court that the businessman needed protection as there is a threat to his life.
The Bench said that if there was any threat to his life, it will do the necessary.
“We will say here is a citizen who claims to be a whistleblower and fears for his life. And he should be given adequate security,” the court said.
Ramachandran said a fresh summon of the CBI and the change of Investigation Officer (IO) in the case would complicate the task of Justice (retired) Patnaik, who is supervising the probe by Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) into charges against CBI Director Alok Verma.
To this the Bench said, “Let the task of supervision be handled by Justice Patnaik. He will do whatever is required.”
The Bench thereafter dictated the order and said adequate security should be provided by Hyderabad Police SP to the petitioner (Sana) and rejected the other two prayers to stay CBI summon and recording of his statement in the presence of Justice (retd) Patnaik.
The CBI had booked Asthana on October 15 on the basis of a complaint from Sana, facing probe in a 2017 case involving controversial meat exporter Moin Qureshi, claiming that the Special Director had allegedly helped him to get a clean chit from the probe agency. The SIT led by Asthana, probing the Moin Qureshi case, had sought custodial interrogation of Sana but the move was allegedly stalled by Verma, Asthana’s complaint (dated August 24) being probed by CVC alleges.
The businessman, in his plea, had referred to the apex court’s October 26 order on the petition of CBI Director by which the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) was asked to conclude inquiry against Verma within two weeks under the supervision of former SC judge Patnaik.
Sana’s plea claimed the CBI moved “in haste” to issue notice to him under Section 160 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to attend the proceedings on October 29 before the probe agency and said that the same be recorded before Justice Patnaik.
He had sought the court’s direction that he be questioned only under the supervision of Justice Patnaik.
Sana had also said that he was willing to cooperate with the probe by coming to Delhi as and when directed by the judge supervising the enquiry.
The feud between Verma and Asthana led to an ‘unprecedented and extraordinary” situation forcing to the Government to divest them of their responsibilities till the CVC probe against them is over. On Sana’s complaint, the CBI had even registered a criminal case against its own Special Director Rakesh Asthana and arrested a Deputy SP under him Devendra Kumar.
