In probing corruption cases against the high and mighty, the CBI got a major relief last week as the Supreme Court stayed an unreasonable Allahabad High Court decision that allowed civil servants a special concession to be first heard by a fact finding enquiry before being prosecuted by the CBI in corruption cases.
K Dhanalakshmi, a lady IAS officer, faced a CBI probe for amassing disproportionate assets to the tune of rupees three crore during her tenure as Deputy Secretary in Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. Presently posted as District Magistrate of Sultanpur in Uttar Pradesh, on her writ petition, the High Court constituted a fact finding enquiry into the allegations by giving her a personal hearing, something that was unacceptable and legally untenable by the CBI.
In its appeal before the apex court, the CBI appeal said, “Any direction for a parallel investigation by a fact finding body would not only dilute the sanctity of the investigation conducted by the CBI… but would also seriously prejudice the ongoing investigation.” Senior advocate Mukul Gupta who argued for CBI told the apex bench headed by Justice P Sathasivam that the March 18 order of the High Court would derail CBI probe and would create a precedent for all times to come creating confusion in the mind of courts thus crippling the efforts of the premier investigating agency to secure the ends of justice.
The apex court stayed the HC order and issued notice on the CBI appeal, giving an opportunity to the accused officer. The CBI also pointed out to the Court that the order passed by the HC had no legal basis as allowing a departmental proceeding would undermine CBI’s investigation and in the end the accused would have the benefit of two decisions, one by the fact finding committee and the other by CBI.
The High Court on January 31, 2013 had first directed the Department of Personnel and Training to constitute the enquiry committee. On April 10, this Committee was formed under Surekha Sahu, Director in Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. The enquiry is still pending and no final decision has yet been taken, CBI informed the apex court.
The FIR filed by CBI on November 23, 2011 had accused the lady officer to have acquired assets unknown to her known sources of income in her name and in the name of her mother. Pursuant to raids conducted at her residence in Delhi as well as the residence of her mother and sister at Bangalore, the CBI netted disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs 3,15,92,163 as benami properties in the name of the mother, who, according to CBI, abetted the IAS officer to acquire and possess the said assets in her name.