In a major setback to the ruling NCP in Maharashtra, the CBI has registered an FIR against its senior leader and former State Home Minister Anil Deshmukh under section 7 of the amended Prevention of Corruption of Corruption Act and section 120-b (conspiracy) of IPC for an “attempt to obtain undue advantage for important and dishonest performance of the public duty”.
Having prima facie found “cognisance offences” of corruption and conspiracy against him during a Preliminary Enquiry (PE) conducted by it into the allegations made against him by Mumbai’s former Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh, the CBI on April 21 registered a regular case against him and other unknown people. It entrusted the investigations in the case to Mukesh Kumar, DSP, AC II, New Delhi.
Three days after it registered an FIR against Deshmukh and others, the CBI on Saturday carried out searches at Deshmukh’s Nagpur residence and several locations in Maharashtra linked to him and a few of his associates and questioned him for a few hours once again.
Sporting PPE kits, the CBI teams visited Deshmukh’s home and other locations in Mumbai, Thane and Pune.
As part of the Preliminary Enquiry (PE) ordered against him by the Bombay High Court, the CBI had earlier on April 14 questioned Deshmukh for eight-long hours on Wednesday in connection with the allegations of corruption made against him by the former Police Commissioner.
The CBI has based its FIR against Deshmukh and others on the recommendation made by CBI’s DSP R. S. Gunjiyal who conducted the PE against the former State Home Minister in line with the order passed by the Bombay High Court on April 5 that a complaint made by one Dr Jaishri Lamanrao Patil.
“The Preliminary Enquiry prima facie revealed that a prima facie offence is made out in the matter, wherein the then Home Minister of Maharashtra Anil Deshmukh and unknown others have attempted to obtain undue advantage for improper and dishonest performance of their public duty,” Gunjiyal stated in his letter recommending registration of an FIR against Deshmukh and
others.
Among other things, Gunjiyal also stated in his letter recommending registration of an FIR against Deshmukh and others – which has made part of the FIR – that now suspended and incarcerated police Sachin Vaze, who had earlier been reinstated into the police force after being out service for more than 15 years, “was entrusted with most sensational and important
cases of Mumbai city police and that the then Home Minister was in knowledge of the said fact”.
While recommending the registration of an FIR under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) of Corruption Act, 2018 and section 120-b (conspiracy) of IPC, Gunjiyal quoted the allegation made by the former police commissioner that Deshmukh and others had exercised
“undue influence” over the transfers and postings of officials and “thereby exercising undue influence over the performance of official dues by the officials.
It may be recalled that three days after he was shunted and posted in a relatively insignificant post as the Commandant General of Home Guards, Singh had in an eight-page sensational letter written to the chief minister Uddhav Thackeray on March 20 alleged that State Home Minister Deshmukh had asked now arrested and suspended police officer Sachin Vaze last month to "collect" a staggering Rs 100 crore per month from bars, restaurants and other sources.
In the operative part of his much-discussed explosive letter, Singh wrote: “.... Sachin Vaze who was heading the Crime Intelligence Unit of the Crime Branch of the Mumbai Police was called by Shri Anil Deshmukh, Hon’ble Home Minister, Maharashtra to his official residence Dyaneshwar several times in last few months and repeatedly instructed to assist in collection of funds for the Hon’ble Home Minister,” Singh wrote in his letter.
“In and around mid-February and thereafter, the Hon’ble Home Minister had called Shri Vaze to his official residence. At that time, one or two staff members of the Hon’ble Home Minister including his Personal Secretary, Mr. Palande, were also present,” Singh stated.
“The Hon’ble Home Minister expressed to Vaze that he had a target to accumulate Rs. 100 crore a month. For achieving the aforesaid target, the Hon’ble Home Minister told Shri Vaze that there are about 1,750 bars, restaurants and other establishments in Mumbai and if a sum of Rs. 2-3 lakhs each was collected from each of 3 them, a monthly collection of Rs. 40-50 crores was achievable. The Hon’ble Home Minister added that the rest of the collection could be made from other sources,” the former CP wrote.
"Vaze came to my office the same day and informed me of the above. I was shocked with the above discussion and was mulling over how to deal with the situation,” Singh said.
On his part, State Home minister Deshmukh – in a tweet put in the evening --debunked Singh’s charge and said: “The former Commissioner of Police, Param Bir Singh has made false allegations in order to save himself as the involvement of Sachin Waze in Mukesh Ambani & Mansukh Hiren’s case is becoming clearer from the investigation carried out so far & threads are leading to Mr. Singh as well”.
On April 5, Deshmukh resigned as the State Home Minister within hours after the Bombay High Court ordered a “Preliminary Enquiry” (PE) by the CBI into the serious charges of corruption made against him by Singh.
A HC division bench ordered a PE by the CBI on the ground that “there can be no fair, impartial, unbiased and untainted probe, if the same were entrusted to the State police force”, prompting Deshmukh to put in his papers saying that in the wake of high court’s order, “it is not morally prudent on my part to continue in the post.
Alluding to a press release issued by Deshmukh suggesting that “ he is not averse to facing any inquiry”, the HC bench ordered an inquiry and said: “Such preliminary inquiry shall be conducted in accordance with law and concluded as early as possible but preferably within 15 (fifteen) days from receipt of a copy of this order”
“Once the preliminary inquiry is complete, the Director, CBI shall be at liberty to decide on the future course of action, also in accordance with law. Should the Director, CBI see no reason to proceed further, Dr. Patil shall be duly informed of the same,” the Judges observed.
“It is needless to observe that the preliminary inquiry and further action, if at all required, would proceed uninfluenced by the fact that this Court has ordered such an action,” the HC bench added.