Expressing serious concern over a threat allegedly received by Prof. S.K. Dube from Enforcement Directorate officials for writing a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Delhi Commissioner of Police to file an affidavit in a week, stating what action was taken on his April 4 e-mail complaint.
A Bench of Justices B. Sudershan Reddy and S.S. Nijjar gave this direction on an application by Julio F. Ribeiro and others bringing to the court's notice the threat Prof. Dube received.
Prof. Dube, in his complaint, had made serious allegations against the officers named therein.
The Bench said: “The affidavit shall duly state as to whether any First Information Report has been registered and, if so, the stage of investigation.” It also directed the Centre to file its response in two weeks, though Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam denied the allegations levelled against the officers.
Senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the petitioners, said Prof. Dube was allegedly threatened by an ED official for writing to the Prime Minister, questioning the credentials of Director Arun Mathur.
Shocked at the submission, Justice Reddy told the Solicitor-General: “We are concerned with this affidavit. Just because the letter was addressed to the Prime Minister, one of your [ED] officers threatened him. We won't keep quiet. We cannot accept somebody threatening the petitioner before us. These things cannot be allowed when we are seized of the matter.”
Mr. Dhavan said Prof. Dube, in his letter, had alleged that Mr. Mathur and two officers, Prabhakant and S.K. Sahni, enjoyed the hospitality of a private company in Kolkata, being investigated by the ED. Two affidavits had been filed by Mr. Jasbir Singh and Mr. Riberio on the threat received by Prof. Dube, who is now in Vienna.
Mr. Dhavan said Mr. Singh had filed affidavits, referring to Prof. Dube's March 22 letter to the Prime Minister, which said investigation into the black money case under Mr. Mathur's supervision did not inspire confidence as he was allegedly involved in corruption.
Mr. Dhavan submitted that Mr. Prabhakant spoke to Prof. Dube over telephone and threatened him, saying: “Mr. Arun Mathur would set the police and the Intelligence Bureau on him and get him into trouble if he failed to dissociate himself with the letter sent to the Prime Minister's office and that he would be framed in some other case.”
The Bench also heard senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Maharashtra police officer Ashok Shalikaram Deshbhratar, who said he was suspended because he had carried out crucial investigation and interrogation of the Pune-based stud farm owner, Hasan Ali Khan, from January 2008.
Mr. Jethmalani, producing a compact disc of the statements recorded by the officer, alleged, “No. 10 Janpath [residence of Congress president Sonia Gandhi] was involved in this case.” However, Justice Reddy told counsel, “Let us not politicise it. We will deal with the issue in the country's interest.”
The Bench asked the Centre and Maharashtra to file response to Mr. Deshbhratar's application and to the affidavit filed by the petitioners, Mr. Jethmalani and others in the main petition relating to black money.
