Asked to show files, CBI claims they are missing
Sidharth
Times of India, 20 Dec 2008, TNN
MUMBAI: Just when the CBI was ordered to produce three files
pertaining to a seven-year-old corruption case under the Right to
Information Act, the
premier investigating agency said the files were missing.
The files pertain to investigations in a corruption case against three
junior officials of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB).
The case dates back to July 19, 2001, when the CBI laid a trap at the
Mumbai NCB office on a complaint by Navin Dubey, a suspect in a
narcotics case. Dubey was sent with a recording device to the NCB
office, while CBI officers waited outside. The trap fell through after
one of the officers detected the recording device. After failing to
hear from Dubey, the CBI team went to the NCB office to ensure his
well-being.
The CBI conducted a search at the NCB office. The CBI prepared a draft
panchnama on the sequence of events, which they subsequently tore and
replaced with another one. In the second panchnama, the CBI mentioned
that NCB chief Ajay Ubale obstructed the search, which was not in the
draft copy.
The next day, Ubale complained to then joint director of CBI, D
Sivanandhan, about dragging his name. As a fallout, Sivanandhan wrote
to Ubale's seniors seeking his transfer. Ubale challenged it in the
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which held that the transfer
was malafide. The Bombay high court also upheld the order.
Ubale sought sanction from the central government to prosecute CBI
officials__D Sivanandan, then DIG K L Prasad, superintendent of police
(SP), N S Saravde and his deputy Manoj Pangarkar among others for
falsifying the records. Ubale moved the high court when the government
denied permission for prosecution, which is pending.
Meanwhile, Ubale also sought information under RTI and obtained
details which revealed that the witness in Dubey's complaint was
called on July 17, 2001, a day prior to the receipt of his complaint.
The government justified the action in the court saying it was part of
operational exigency.
Ubale filed a complaint before Chief Information Commission (CIC) that
in spite of its order, CBI was withholding certain records. CIC
directed the CBI to allow Ubale access to the records but the agency
did not comply with it. Following this, CIC conducted an inquiry which
revealed that the concerned records-file pertaining to the
investigating officer calling the witness on July 17, 2001, the case
diary and a complaint dated July 16 from Dubey were not available. CBI
officials have denied any wrongdoing in the case.
The CBI, in its reply dated December 14, 2008 to the CIC, stated that
all efforts were made by the concerned officers to find out about the
status of the case files. "All concerned officers have reported that
no such files are available in their office,'' said SP Sujeet Pandey.
This contradicts the government claim that there was an operational
exigency.
http://tinyurl.com/4mjgoa
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Asked_to_show_files_CBI_claims_they_are_missing/articleshow/3864618.cms