Samikhsya Bureau
There has been always debates over the appointment of the CBI directors in India where the country’s leading investigating agency has faced question marks over its impartial functioning. Not only the apex court of the country had once described the agency acting like a “caged parrot” but the latter’s credibility came under the shadows of partial leaning without a court monitored probe.
Now the appointment of Rishi Kumar Shukla as the CBI director too has invited criticism from certain quarters for certain reasons. Quick to take the matter with a pinch of salt, senior Congress leader and leader of the opposition in Lok sabha Mallikarjun Kharge has directed his salvo at the Prime Minister for allowing the selection in the face of questions regarding Shukla’s track-records as an able investigating officer.
In his dissent note to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Kharge said that Shukla, who had been appointed for the post had no experience of investigation in anti-corruption cases, as laid down by the Supreme Court observation in the Vineet Narain judgement.
In his dissent note, Kharge alleged that the PM-led committee diluted the required criteria for the selection of the CBI director, thus violating the spirit of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act and the Supreme court guidelines.
In his note, Kharge, citing the Supreme court observation in the Vineet Narain judgement, said that the committee for the appointment of the CBI director should make its decision based on seniority, integrity and experience in the field of anti- corruption.
“All the three aspects – seniority, integrity and experience in investigation of anti-corruption cases – should be given equal weightage in this matter to get the best suited officers in the shortlist,’’ Kharge said in his dissent note.
Kharge alleged: “The criteria decided in the meeting has diluted this to include investigation experience…This would be both against the letter and spirit of the DSPE Act, which clearly states investigation of anti-corruption cases. Adding of general investigative experience to experience of investigating anti-corruption to enhance overall experience has led to inclusion of candidates who either have no experience or very little experience in investigation of anti-corruption cases.’’
He said that based on the criteria laid down by the DSPE Actand the Supreme court, he was of the view that of the list of candidates submitted to the committee, only S. Javed Ahmed, Rajiv Rai Bhatnagar and Sudeep Lakhtakia met the requirements of experience in investigating anti-corruption cases, in order of merit.
The PM led committee for the selection of the CBI chief had shortlisted the names of five persons – Rajiv Rai Bhatnagar, Rishi Kumar Shukla, Sandeep lakhtakia, S. Javed Ahmed and A. P. Maheshwari, in order of merit, on the basis of criteria of seniority, ACR above a certain cut off and total experience in investigation and anti-corruption of 100 months or more.
Contending that “seniority cannot be the only criteria in an appointment to such a critical post and experience in anti-corruption cases and prior experience of having served in the organisation should also be considered seriously”, Kharge said, “by including officers who do not have experience in investigating anti-corruption cases, the committee is in violation of the DSPE Act and the Supreme Court judgement that guide the appointment of the director, CBI”.
