Jharkhand HC poser to govt: Can person accused of corruption file affidavit on behalf of State?

CJ Ravi Ranjan asked the Advocate General how an accused was allowed to serve an affidavit on behalf of the State, and that too in a “sensitive matter”. To this, AG Rajiv Ranjan replied that the trial against DC Chhavi Ranjan was still on and that he was out on bail. However, the court went on to rebuke the State.

“If the State says it is good, then… unko bana dijiye ACB ka secretary (then make him secretary of the Anti-Corruption Bureau).”

The case against Ranchi DC Chavvi Ranjan pertains to 2015, when five Sagwan trees and one Sisham tree, valued in lakhs, were allegedly illegally cut from the premises of the Koderma zila parishad. Chhavi Ranjan was then DC of Koderma. A case was registered at Markachho police station in Koderma, with the state ACB later taking over the investigation.

Although not named in the FIR, a preliminary inquiry by the Vigilance Bureau stated that trees were cut allegedly at the behest of Chhavi Ranjan, following which then CM Raghubar Das granted ‘prosecution sanction’ against the 2011-batch IAS officer.

In 2016, Chhavi Ranjan filed an anticipatory bail plea in the Jharkhand HC. While hearing the bail plea, a single-judge bench of Justice Anant Bijay Singh noted how the then Deputy Development Commissioner of Koderma, one of the witnesses in the case, had accused Chhavi Ranjan of pressuring him to change his written statement and to not file a ‘named FIR’.

“…Keeping in view the conduct of the petitioner, he does not deserve the privilege of bail,” Justice Singh had said. However, the court later took a lenient stand and granted Chhavi Ranjan bail on the condition that he surrender his passport.

On Thursday, after reading the 2016 bail order of the High Court, Chief Justice Ravi Ranjan said, “State being a prosecutor in the case (felling of trees)… at the same time the State is saying he is fit to file an affidavit. He is an accused. Under CrPC 164 statement was given by a witness, then DDC Koderma, that (DC) Ranjan had asked not to institute a named FIR and had also pressured him to change the statement of other witness…Kis tarah ka aadmi hai ye (What kind of person is he)?”

AG Rajiv Ranjan then said he would file a reply and argue on May 24. “…Since the officer [Chhavi Ranjan] is not there, it will not be proper to record this in the order.”