Sunday, 3 February 2019

MAMATA BANERJEE, RAJEEV KUMAR v CBI (FEB 3, 2019 INCIDENT) : CONSTITUTIONAL And LEGAL ISSUES




In West Bengal a big scam was noticed through ponzi scheme or chit fund type scheme. Companies collected some money and promised to give heavy return. Sardha and other companies were involved in this scheme and scam where the companies cheated lakhs of people most of whom were people from poor and weaker section of society. (poor persons invested even Rs 100 in the scheme).  The Sardha group started its nefarious design in 2006 and the scam was noticed in 2013. This group and other groups may have collected around 20000 crores from West Bengal, Orissa, Assam, Bihar, Tripura and duped millions of people. Mamata Banerjee constituted a special investigation team (SIT) comprising four IPS officers headed by Rajeev Kumar who is currently Commissioner of Police, Kolkata. In 2013 he being head of SIT has investigated the case, collected various documents, electronic evidences, pen drives, CD, etc. Kunal Kumar Ghosh, Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha, Journalist and MP, TMC was arrested in 2013. The Supreme Court on May 9, 2014 ordered CBI to take over investigation of Sardha scam and other similar scam in all concerned States. Certain arrests were made. Srinjoy Bose, Member of Parliament from TMC was arrested in Nov, 2014 by CBI. CBI also summoned four IPS officers constituting SIT to appear and give details of their investigation. Rajeev Kumar, CP, Kolkata has also been summoned at least three times but he did not appear. The CBI also asked for police staff as the volume of scam was too big and the CBI required human resources. CBI approached the Supreme Court regarding non cooperation of the West Bengal government. On July 16, 2018 the Supreme Court observed that such attitude of West Bengal government was "Sorry State of Affairs" and instructed the government to cooperate CBI. The Supreme Court also asked police officers to approach court in case they feel unnecessarily harassed. In August 2018 CBI again summoned Rajeev Kumar who did not turn up. Meanwhile CBI got engaged in its own trouble between two top officers (Alok verma and Rakesh Asthana) where both alleged each other of serious corruption charges followed by removal of CBI director. It seems after the internal conflict of CBI was over, CBI instructed Kolkata office to meet and inquire Rajeev Kumar because CBI apprehended that crucial evidences are destroyed and disappeared. Therefore, to further investigate the CBI team tried to meet Rajeev Kumar, the Police Commissioner of Kolkata.  CBI team was stopped, manhandled and detained by Kolkata Police. Mamata Banerjee alleged that CBI was being used by Modi government because in West Bengal there was a coalition meet of various political parties. Mamata Banerjee has also alleged that CBI has approached Kolkata police without permission of the State government. Is the CBI legally required to seek permission of State government in Sardha chit fund and Rose Valley scam? The answer is no because of two reasons, constitutional and statutory.
A.   Constitutional reason
The Supreme Court ordered CBI to conduct investigation in this scam of Sardha ponzi scheme (Subrata Chattoraj v. Union of India, May 9, 2014). This order is given under article 32 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court has exercised its power of judicial review under article 32 which is a part of basic structure of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court exercises constitutional power under article 32 and therefore, this order is above any other provision, be it statutory or executive. If the central government gives CBI any direction to begin a probe, in that case, CBI cannot proceed without the consent of State government because both central and State government are executive authorities and both are bound by the provision (section 6 here) of DSPEA, 1946 (DSPEA deals with CBI). What to tell about Supreme Court, even high court can give direction to CBI to conduct investigation and CBI is not required to seek any permission. This is also not violative of federal feature. (see, State of West Bengal v. CPDR, 2010, a Constitution Bench decision).
B.   Statutory reason
It is being argued that Ms Mamata Banerjee has withdrawn the consent given under section 6 of DSPEA in Nov 2018. The Supreme Court passed a judgement (Subrata Chattoraj v Union of India)on  May 9, 2014 where it ordered the CBI to conduct investigation into the scams to the tune of 10000 crores (and 2015 the Supreme Court apprehended that it may be 20000 crore). Such withdrawal of consent by an executive authority is inconsequential because the order was by the Supreme Court under constitutional power. For the sake of legal discussion only the legal question is whether the withdrawal of such consent has retrospective operation or prospective operation. Will such withdrawal be operative from back date and stop previous investigations? There is another Supreme Court judgement which removes the cloud. In the case of Kazi Lhendup Dorji v. Central Bureau of Investigation decided on 29 March, 1994, (1994 Supp (2) SCC 116) by a full bench (three judges) the Court held-“ Section 6 of the Act, operates only prospectively and the said withdrawal would not apply to cases which were pending investigation on the date of issuance of the said Notification. The Notification dated January 7, 1987, does not preclude the C.B.I, from submitting the report in the competent court under Section 173 Cr. P.C. on the basis of the investigation conducted by it ….
Therefore, the argument that CBI did not take consent of the West Bengal government or the step of CBI violates federal structure or the consent was withdrawn has no sound legal basis.  Other objections are that there is a court order not to take coercive measure. And CBI did not go with warrant to meet Rajeev Kumar at his residence. For normal inquiry no warrant is required under law that too when the Supreme Court has ordered investigation with free hand. And talking to an SIT chief is not a coercive measure that too when he did not honoured various summons of the CBI and CBI had apprehensions that evidences are destroyed or disappeared.
 The CBI was doing its job and ensuring rule of law be prevailed. The government of West Bengal and the police chief has not discharged their obligation and acted against rule of law. Hope the Supreme Court will take this matter seriously and direct the West Bengal government to cooperate with CBI.

No comments:

Post a Comment