Gujarat cadre IPS officer Rakesh Asthana had an outstanding career: Centre to apex court

The court reserved its order after hearing Venugopal and the counsel for the NGO, Prashant Bhushan. It will pronounce the order on November 28.

Bhushan said that Asthana’s appointment was illegal as his name had surfaced in a diary recovered during a raid conducted by the Income Tax department at offices and other premises of the company Sterling Biotech Ltd.

Alleging that Asthana had close relations with the firm which was under the lens, he contended “we are not saying if the officer did something wrong, but this is a question of institutional integrity which was underlined by the Supreme Court in the case of Chief Vigilance Commissioner P J Thomas”.

The Attorney-General countered this and said the FIR had not named Asthana. “The FIR is against unknown people and by the time it is proved, careers of people would have been lost”, Venugopal said.

He also submitted in court minutes of the CBI selection committee meeting held on October 21 in the office of the Chief Vigilance Commissioner and said the CBI director, who was a special invitee, had produced a confidential letter which had an “unsigned note on Sterling Biotech and related entities”.

“The committee considered the matter and it was also discussed with the director, CBI. Keeping in view that there is finding in these papers that the person mentioned therein is the same person under consideration for appointment and there is nothing about the veracity of the contents of the document and the further fact that the CBI itself moved the present proposal on July 6, 2017, wherein it has been categorically stated that Rakesh Asthana is suitable to hold the post of Special Director CBI, and no further verified material has been brought on record, the committee decided to recommend him for the appointment as Special Director, CBI,” the Attorney-General said, quoting the minutes.

He added that “the committee has also kept in view the fact that the Vigilance Commission does not take cognizance of complaints received just on the verge of appointments or promotions unless they are proven misconducts”.

Asthana was the additional director anyway and throughout his tenure, there has not been a single complaint against him, Venugopal pointed out.

Bhushan said he had been denied the minutes when he applied for the same under the Right to Information Act.