No CVC clean chit yet to CBI Director Alok Verma

Satya Prakash
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, November 16

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has not given a clean chit to CBI Director Alok Verma yet as it is still investigating certain allegations of corruption against him, the Supreme Court was informed on Friday.

"The CVC has filed a very exhaustive report. Report can be categorised into four parts—very complimentary on some charges, not so complimentary on some charges, very uncomplimentary on some charges and some require further investigation," a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogogi said after perusing the CVC report.

Justice AK Patnaik, who supervised the CVC probe into corruption allegations against Verma, has submitted a separate note to the top court.

The CVC had submitted its report to the Supreme Court in a sealed cover on Monday. But even before the top court could peruse the CVC’s report, a section of the media reported had reported that the probe against Verma yielded “nothing substantial”.

The Bench—also comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph—ordered that a copy of the CVC report be given to the CBI Director, Attorney General and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta who is representing CVC.

It turned down repeated requests from senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing CBI Special Director Rakesh Asthana, to be made a party to the case and given a copy of the CVC report.

The Bench asked Verma to file his response to the CVC report in a sealed cover and posted the matter for further hearing on Tuesday, November 20.

On behalf of Verma, senior counsel Fali Nariman said he will be ready with response to the CVC report by Monday.

It asked the parties to maintain confidentiality for the sake of sanctity and public confidence in CBI.

The court is hearing Verma's petition challenging the Centre’s order divesting him of his duties and sending him on leave along with Asthana. He has also challenged the government’s order of appointing M Nageswara Rao as Interim CBI Director.

Asthana, who has been divested of his powers as special director and sent on leave, too, has challenged the government’s decision.

The Bench was amused to hear from Mehta that despite being counsel for CVC, he had not seen the report. What followed was even more interesting.

CJI Gogoi asked: "Who are you?"

"I am CVC", responds Mehta. "You are the author of report and you have not seen it," wonders CJI? 

"I as a lawyer have not seen it,” Mehta responds again. 

Senior advocate Rajiv Dhavan, representing CBI DSP AK Bassi, tried to raise the issue of his transfer but the Bench was not inclined to take up the issue at this stage. 

"Where have you been transferred?" asks CJI. 

"Port Blair," responded Dhavan.

"It is a good place…Be there for a few days," CJI told him but agreed to hear him on Tuesday.

On behalf of Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge, who has challenged Verma's removal, senior counsel Kapil Sibal wanted to be heard.

"Who are you?" asked CJI Gogogi.

"For Mr Kharge," says Sibal.

"The Leader of Opposition or the single largest party? We forgot about you," the CJI commented.

As ordered by the Supreme Court, Rao has already filed a report regarding decisions taken by him between October 23 and 26, including transferred ordered by him.

The top court—which had on October 26 asked the CVC to complete its inquiry supervised by former Supreme Court judge AK Patnaik in two weeks—would consider now consider Verma’s response to the CVC’s report into allegations made in the August 24 note/letter of the Cabinet Secretary against him on November 20.

It had restrained CBI interim director from taking any policy or major decisions and asked him to perform only routine functions essential to keep the probe agency functional. It is expected to examine all decisions taken by him.

At the root of the controversy is an intense infighting between Verma and Special Director Rakesh Asthana, who have been at loggerheads for months. After Asthana wrote to the CVC against Verma, the CBI registered a corruption case against its special director who had to rush to the Delhi High Court for protection. 

Verma has contended that he was appointed for a two-year term with the approval of a selection panel comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and the CJI. The government could not have curtailed it, he said citing SC's 1997 Vineet Narain judgment and amendments in the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act under which CBI was set up.