Senior IPS officer Alok K. Verma told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the decision to remove him as CBI Director was taken overnight by the Union government and the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
Mr. Verma was divested of his responsibilities late on October 23. An order issued by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet said M. Nageswara Rao would take over the duties of the Director with immediate effect.
Mr. Verma hinted that the present predicament might be the result of “certain investigations” into “high functionaries.”
“The CBI is expected to function independently and autonomously. There are bound to be occasions when certain investigations into high functionaries do not take the direction that may be desirable to the government,” Mr. Verma said in his petition, hours after the government and the CVC issued the orders.
Urgent mentioning
In an urgent oral mentioning before Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi as soon as the court assembled in the morning, Mr. Verma said the treatment accorded to him violated his fundamental rights and amounted to a blot on the CBI’s independence. His advocates, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Pooja Dhar, informed the court that their client came to know of the orders only a few hours ago.
Justice Gogoi allowed the petition, and posted it for hearing on Friday.
In his petition, Mr. Verma said the “details of many cases which have led to the present circumstances are extremely sensitive.”
He did not want to put them in his pleadings, but was ready to submit the details to the court. “Not all influence exerted by the political government would be found explicitly or in writing. More often than not, it is tacit, and requires considerable courage to withstand,” he said.
The feud between Mr. Verma and Special Director Rakesh Asthana peaked when the CBI filed a case against the latter recently. Both the government and the CVC have said in their orders that asking Mr. Verma and Mr. Asthana to sit out was necessary to safeguard the CBI’s credibility.
Mr. Verma blamed Mr. Asthana for thwarting decisions in “very sensitive cases” monitored by the Supreme Court. Mr. Asthana threw up hurdles when everyone in the CBI agreed on a particular course of action. Mr. Verma accused Mr. Asthana of concocting evidence to damage his reputation.
He said the “overnight decision” was a violation of Section 4B of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946, which grants the CBI Director a secure term of two years to ensure independence of functioning.
Even as Section 4A of the DSPE Act mandates appointment of the CBI Director by a committee of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India, Section 4B(2) requires the committee’s consent to transfer him. His divestment bypassed the committee’s mandate. He said the order, issued without the principles of natural justice having been followed, was “patently illegal” and a clear interference by the government in the CBI.
