The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked whether it is expected to close its eyes, “suppose if some very very serious matters” come to light.
The court’s observation came after perusing the CBI’s status report on the examination of former Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in Shillong in connection with the multi-crore ponzi scam cases, including the Saradha and Rose Valley scandals. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, however refrained from making any comments on the contents.
The petition stems from a February 3 incident in which the West Bengal police manhandled a CBI team that went to Mr. Kumar’s Kolkata residence to question him in the Saradha scam case.
The Supreme Court, while transferring the probe into the ponzi scams to the CBI from the State police, had ordered the latter to fully support the central investigating agency to reach the truth.
However, what began as a contempt case has now snowballed into the CBI levelling allegations that Mr. Kumar, as the functional head of the West Bengal government-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), actively connived with the high-profile accused in the ponzi scams to tamper with the crucial call data records (CDRs).
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, for the CBI, said the statements made by the contemnors in their affidavits were misleading and demonstrably false. The court asked the CBI to file an application listing the allegations supported by full facts and particulars in the next 10 days.
It rejected a plea by the West Bengal government counsel and senior advocate A.M. Singhvi to spare the State Chief Secretary and the DGP.
The Bench said it would hear the application in detail after the contemnors file their responses to the CBI’s application.
“Suppose if some very, very serious matters come to light, should we close our eyes to all that? Something sufficiently serious has been brought to our knowledge…We will look into allegations and counter-allegations,” Chief Justice Gogoi said, addressing Mr. Singhvi.
The court also perused separate affidavits filed by CBI Director Rishi Kumar Shukla, the agency’s Joint Director Pankaj Kumar Srivastava whose Kolkata residence was allegedly surrounded by the West Bengal police, and finally Tathagat Vardhan, a Deputy Superintendent of Police with the CBI, who was part of the CBI team which was roughed up on February 3.
Mr. Shukla said the Saradha case itself involves the non-refund of over ₹1,983.02 crore of a total ₹2,459.59 crore collected from lakhs of investors. This is only the principal amount.
The CBI Director said the SIT took 14 months to share the CDRs of five mobile numbers of Debjani Mukherjee, one of the promoters/directors of Saradha group, for the period between 2012 and 2013. The CBI was provided with a blank CD and then later given records for only a limited period. The complete CDRs were finally obtained from the service provider. It said there were discrepancies in the frequency and number of calls with regard to one of the mobile numbers of Ms. Mukherjee.
