PIL seeks quashing of Rakesh Asthana’s appointment as CBI Special Director

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, November 2

A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the appointment of Rakesh Asthana as CBI Special Director on the ground that it was “illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and in violation of the principle of impeccable integrity and institutional integrity”.

A 1984-batch Gujarat cadre IPS officer, Asthana was appointed CBI Special Director on October 22, 2017.

Noting that the CBI investigates sensitive cases involving powerful and influential individuals, petitioner Common Cause -- an NGO – said, “Strict adherence to the letter and spirit of the statutory law in such appointments is necessary for upholding the rule of law and for enforcement of the rights of the citizens…”

The petitioner NGO alleged that the CBI was investigating “Diary 2011” in which Asthana’s name appeared. The probe agency had registered two FIRs dated on August 30 and October 25 this year with regard to the said diary against certain Income Tax Officers and other public servants “who appear to have been paid huge sums of money by the Sandesara and Sterling Groups of Companies”, it alleged demanding quashing of Asthana’s appointment.

It also urged the court to direct the government to produce the entire record relating to Asthana’s selection and appointment as CBI Special Director.

The petitioner said the Special Director of the CBI was the second highest authority in the organisation after the Director and supervised almost all the important cases being handled by the CBI and is also responsible for constitution of investigating teams for probing corruption cases.

The Supreme Court and Parliament – both have made determined efforts to enhance the functional autonomy of such senior level officers of the CBI and to limit/eliminate the executive discretion in the matter of appointment of such key functionaries, it submitted.

“The appointment to a high post such as that of the Special Director of CBI itself is bound to create situations where officers junior to Respondent No. 2 (Asthana) would not be able to conduct a free, fair and fearless probe into his role. Thus his appointment would violate the principle of institutional integrity,” the petition read.

It said the Supreme Court directed that the selection of officers up to the post of Joint Director shall be decided by a committee involving CVC based on the inputs from the Director, CBI, in order to ensure that the unfettered discretion of the government to appoint officers in the CBI is circumscribed.

The petitioner requested the court to issue a direction to the Centre to transfer Asthana out of the CBI during the pendency of the CBI investigation into the FIR dated August 30, 2017 registered by the CBI concerning the alleged payouts to various public servants by Sterling Biotech Group and Sandesara Group.