SC stays Karnataka HC order for fresh probe in KPSC case
The Supreme Court has stayed the Karnataka High Court’s directions for constituting a Special Investigation Team and ordering a de novo probe into the alleged irregularities in the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) veterinary officer recruitment.
A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Vijay Bishnoi issued notice on the Karnataka government’s plea challenging the September 21 decision of the High Court by which it had constituted an SIT to investigate the alleged irregularities in the recruitment of 400 veterinary officers and related allegations concerning other KPSC recruitments.
It sought response from the original petitioners before the High Court on the plea of the State Government by October 12 and directed the State to file an additional affidavit in a sealed cover setting out its objections, if any, to the officers appointed to the SIT.
It said the State may also suggest alternative names for the probe team while clarifying that the interim stay applies to certain paragraphs of the High Court’s judgment, which dealt with the constitution of the SIT and a de novo probe into the alleged irregularities.
“In the meantime, the directions in paragraph 34(i) and 34(ii) shall remain stayed. Issue notice returnable on October 12. By the next date, the state shall submit in sealed cover delineating the objections, if any, against the members of the SIT constituted under the order of the high court and may suggest alternative names for the SIT”, the bench noted in its order on Thursday.
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the State, contended that the CID was already looking into the matter and the investigation was nearly complete.
While opposing the fresh investigation, he said that there were no specific allegations against the CID officers investigating the case to warrant a de novo investigation.
He also objected to the high court selecting members of the SIT without seeking the State’s suggestions and pointed out the inclusion of Alok Kumar, Director General and Inspector General of Prisons, in the SIT.
He referred to a separate CBI probe that allegedly raised questions about Kumar’s role in phone interception and tapping.
Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for the respondents, highlighted that the original prayer before the High Court was for a CBI investigation and questioned the State’s objection to the constitution of the SIT comprising state police officers.
He submitted that the State cannot dictate the composition of the investigating team and pointed out that the State government has till now not notified the SIT or transferred the relevant records following the High Court’s order. On September 21, the High Court ordered the formation of an SIT to investigate irregularities by the KPSC in the recruitment of veterinary doctors.
It had directed the formation of the SIT headed by Kumar, handover of evidence from the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the jurisdictional police to the SIT.
Apart from Kumar, the SIT will have Forensic Science Laboratory director Divya Gopinath, who is an Inspector General of Police rank officer, DCPs Anup Shetty and Shama Mishra, and Superintendent of Police Kushal Chouksay.
It had directed the SIT to submit a report of investigation within 100 days of commencement of investigation and a progress report for every 30 days.
The High Court had directed the state government to issue a notification declaring the SIT, now constituted, to be a police station for the purposes of investigation.
The KPSC had been under scrutiny after Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot suspended its chairman, Shivashankarappa S Sahukar, following allegations that he allegedly facilitated the illegal selection of his two daughters as Industrial Extension Officers.
While Sahukar is ‘missing’, the registrar of the KPSC, Gyanendra Kumar Gangwar, an IAS officer, was arrested along with a middleman, Basavaraj Kannale.
