The Supreme Court on Thursday said the CBI was not “circumscribed” in any manner to investigate the role of Coal Ministers in the block allocation scam, which also relates to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who was Coal Minister from 2006 to 2009.
With FIRs not naming any Minister yet, PIl petitioner and advocate Ml Sharma raised concerns on whether investigations were “one-sided”. Sharma said, “In none of the 15 FIRs has the CBI named any Coal Minister. Only the allottees (of coal blocks) are being inquired into…If none of their names is in the FIRs, then the object of investigation will become infructuous.”
To this, a Bench of Justices Madan B lokur and Kurian Joseph, headed by RM lodha, noted, “The CBI enquiry is not circumscribed in any manner. It is an open enquiry.” Pointing out that investigation had not been closed, the Bench added, “Whatever they (CBI) want to unearth and whosoever they want to investigate, they are free to do so.”
The court’s comments come at a time when fingers are being pointed at Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. With the Government cornered over missing files and questions being raised on whether they corresponded to Singh’s tenure, the court gave a free hand to CBI to carry out a full-fledged probe.
later, the Bench heard Attorney General GE Vahanvati on requirement of sanction to inquire against officers above Joint Secretary rank. He pointed out on behalf of the Centre that in court-directed investigations, approval of the Centre under Section 6A of Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act would be necessary.
However, the position would defer in a court-monitored probe, where the court has to be updated on progress. Vahanvati clarified that for questioning an officer above Joint Secretary rank, approval was not required. However, Section 6A was applicable only in cases where material was brought to show prima facie allegations against the official.
This argument was opposed by the CBI, which disagreed with the distinction between court-monitored or court-directed probes. CBI special counsel Amarendra Saran pointed out that approval under Section 6A would only apply to a situation where the court ordered CBI to probe a murder case against a public servant, in which material under the Prevention of Corruption Act surfaced. In such a scenario, the agency will require sanction.
On progress of investigation in the coal scam, Saran sought permission of the court to induct three new officers, as the Centre had issued orders permitting CBI to probe the role of officers and PSUs of two States — Kerala and Jharkhand. These had earlier accorded sanction to the agency for the Coalgate probe. The CBI application will be heard on September 10.