Pending
case hits Neeraj Kumar's CBI race
NEW DELHI: The last lap
of the race for who takes over from A P Singh as the CBI chief next month
promises to be interesting, with the Delhi Police Commissioner Neeraj Kumar moving
the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against being benched on grounds of a
pending court matter against him.
The CAT will
hear the matter on November 23.
Kumar, a 1976 officer of UT cadre, who had a nine-year eventful
stint with the CBI, ranked third in terms of seniority among the six names
suggested by CBI director A
P Singh for succeeding him. He had appeared a strong contender for the coveted
job before the Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC)-led selection panel excluded
him from consideration because of a case pending against him in the Delhi High
Court.
So, while the names of two senior-most officers — ITBP
director-general Ranjit Sinha and National Investigation Agency (NIA) chief S C
Sinha — the exclusion of Kumar's name paved the way for inclusion of the fourth
senior-most candidate, DG (Home Guards), Uttar Pradesh, Atul in the panel.
The case against Kumar relates to a petition filed by Vijay
Agarwal, being investigated by the CBI in a disproportionate assets case along
with his brother, the controversial ex-ED official Ashok Agarwal, seeking a
direction for filing a police complaint against Kumar and another CBI officer
Vinod Kumar Pandey for criminal intimidation and illegal confinement of an
accused.
Government sources have justified the "red card"
because of the embarrassment UPA suffered when P J Thomas's appointment as
Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) was cancelled because of a pending criminal
case. "Even if the decision seemed slightly unfair on Kumar, the selection
panel feared his suitability for the CBI director's post could eventually be
challenged in the court," said a senior government official.
However, others argued that the two cases are as different as
apples and oranges. "Unlike Thomas, the case against Kumar is not that of
alleged personal corruption. The case is against the CBI", said a senior
official source, stressing that Kumar has been cleared in all the in-house
investigations conducted by the CBI. Interestingly, he got a clean chit based
on investigation by S C Sinha, who now heads the NIA.
Vijay Agarwal alleged in that they were criminally intimidated
by a CBI Inspector directly at Kumar's instance. They even claimed that after
he had intimidated them, the Inspector concerned called up Kumar in their
presence to inform him that his (Kumar's) instructions had been carried out.
Based on the complaint, Justice R C Jain of the Delhi HC on his last day on the
bench ordered a probe against Kumar. The order struck many because Justice Jain
had asked for the investigation against the senior CBI officer to be conducted
by Delhi Police's Special Cell and by an officer of a rank not below that of
ACP.
It was stayed by a two-judge bench of the High Court.
Those who feel that Kumar should not have been passed over feel
that the selection panel neither failed to take into account that vested
interests often use "motivated and mala-fide" complaints as weapons,
or that both the CrPC as well as the Delhi Police Special Establish Act which
governs the CBI seek to protect officers against such risks.
They fault the "play-it-safe" reasoning of the
selection committee also because it implies his mere inclusion in the panel
would have automatically guaranteed Kumar the leadership." It is like
saying that a decision in favour of Kumar was ordained had he stayed in contention",
said an official, arguing that the selection panel should have left for the
government to decide instead of prejudging the matter itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment