The Supreme Court on Tuesday sent a stern message to the CBI that none of the senior IPS officers in the team supervising the investigation in the coal block allocation scam will be allowed repatriation to their parent cadre without completing the task.
A bench headed by Chief Justice R M Lodha also said the concerned officers on completing the task can go to their parent cadre only after getting the nod of the apex court which is monitoring the investigation into the scam.
The bench passed the order after noting that one of the three DIGs, V Murgesan, who is supervising the probe in the scam, sought repatriation to his parent cadre Uttarakhand on the ground that he has completed his tenure of deputation with the agency.
“You (Murgesan) have not completed the required task. You have applied for repatriation. You have written about your repatriation. How can it be. First this task has to be completed. All three of you had assured that the investigation will be complete by 2013. “Now try to complete it. Surely you will not be repatriated until you complete the task. When your tenure was ending you should have come to this court and not have applied directly to the department,” the bench, also comprising justices M B Lokur and Kurian Joseph, observed while making it clear that the investigation has to be completed within three months.
The other DIG level officers in the 33-member team are Ravi Kant Mishra and Amit Kumar. The apex court had earlier barred CBI from relieving Mishra from the agency.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, appearing for the Income Tax Department, submitted that tax officers should be allowed to inspect documents seized by the CBI from the premises of Hindalco inorder to initiate proceedings against Aditya Birla Group under the Income Tax Act.
Singh said that there was a report that CBI while raiding the premises of Hindalco across the country recovered unaccounted cash of around Rs 25 crore.
While Singh was making the submission, advocate M L Sharma, who had filed the first PIL on the coalgate, said that the CBI had also seized a diary containing some names and it should also be made available to the apex court before the documents are destroyed.
However, Sharma’s claim was disputed by the CBI counsel and senior advocate Amarendra Sharan, who said “there is no diary and there is only a file”.
Taking note of the submissions, the bench said, “let us have thorough examination of all materials by competent mind”.
The bench was also told by the CBI that out of 168 cases of preliminary enquiry, finality has been reached in …continued »