Chief secretary ‘assault’ case: Manoj Parida and Satyendar Jain clash over appointing special public prosecutors

At the heart of the dispute is the Delhi Police’s request, dated August 21, to the Home Department — that three special public prosecutors be appointed in the case, wherein the chargesheet names Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, his deputy Manish Sisodia and 11 AAP MLAs.

Parida forwarded the police’s request to Jain, urging him to consider it due to the “seriousness of the case”. But Jain promptly wrote back, rejecting the proposal. “Public prosecutors in their cadre are competent to handle this type of cases. Accordingly, it is decided that APP/PP attached with the court of Shri Samar Vishal, Ld ACMM, Patiala House Courts will handle the instant case,” Jain wrote.

Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash was on leave at that point. Then came Parida’s response, where he mentioned he had spoken to Prakash over the phone.

Parida, who is equal to Prakash in terms of seniority in service, said that since Prakash was the complainant in the case, it “may not be appropriate for him to deal with the file”. He wrote this on August 23.

“This is a serious case where the Hon’ble CM and Hon’ble Deputy CM are accused. The regular public prosecutors who work under the elected government may find it difficult to handle the matter. The Hon’ble Minister (Home’s) refusal to engage special public prosecutors may also be looked at from a coloured angle since Hon’ble Minister (Home) works under Hon’ble CM and bears part of collective responsibility,” Parida wrote, requesting that the appointments be allowed with the L-G’s approval.

A day later, Jain once again rejected the proposal stating that Parida’s suggestion falls flat as the same allegation of potential bias can be levelled against him as he also works under the Chief Secretary. Jain added that the contention that public prosecutors will work in a “political and partisan manner” is “ridiculous”.

“ACS (Home) is directed to act strictly as per the directions issued. No one else but the APP/PP attached with the court of Sh Samar Vishal, Ld ACMM, Patiala House Courts should appear in this case,” Jain wrote.

On August 25, the public prosecutor did not appear for court hearing.