On Wednesday, the Supreme Court has rejected the former Mumbai Police Commissioner Parambir Singh’s plea for a CBI probe into his allegations against Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh.
In his plea before the apex court, Singh, a 1988 batch IPS officer also sought quashing of the order transferring him from the post of Mumbai CP alleging it to be arbitrary and illegal. As an interim relief, Singh sought a stay of the operation of his transfer order and direction to the state government, the Centre, and the CBI to immediately take in its custody the CCTV footage from the residence of Deshmukh.
Further, while citing Article 32 of the Constitution, which empowers the Supreme Court to issue orders for enforcement of rights, Singh asserted that Article 32 as the Maharashtra government had withdrawn general consent for the CBI to investigate within the state.
In his eight-page letter to Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, Singh Saturday claimed Deshmukh wanted police officers to collect Rs 100 crore monthly from bars and hotels. Singh had also alleged in the letter that Deshmukh had called Mumbai police API Sachin Waze around mid-February at the ministers’ official residence and told him to collect Rs 100 crore a month.
Singh has alleged that Deshmukh had called police officer Sachin Waze around mid-February at his official residence and asked him to help with collecting funds from bars and restaurants.
“We do acknowledge the matter is serious. But the power of Article 226 is wide. The High Court can deal with it.” Article 226 of the Constitution empowers High Courts to issue directions, orders, or writs for enforcement of various rights,” the top court bench asserted while observing “Liberty to approach the High Court granted.”
Subsequently, Parambir withdrew his plea and said he would approach the Bombay High Court.