HC dismisses contempt plea against Delhi ACB chief

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 11 2017 | 5:07 PM IST
The Delhi High Court today dismissed an AAP government plea seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against ACB chief M K Meena for allegedly violating the court's order by removing an SHO of the anti- graft body.
"The contempt case is dismissed," a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath said.
The AAP government had alleged that Meena "blocked" work of the Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) and violated the court's order to "act" in accordance with the law.
Earlier, the high court had observed that "nothing remains" in the contempt plea against Meena since the AAP government's challenge on the issue of curtailment of the powers of the anti-graft body has been dismissed.
In its contempt plea, the city government had alleged that Meena had arbitrarily replaced the then SHO of the ACB with another person.
It had said that Meena had "willfully violated" the high court's June 29, 2015 order asking the ACB chief, a Lt Governor-appointee, to act in "accordance with the law".
The contempt plea had also alleged that Meena and the SHO appointed by him had not lodged an FIR against two officials of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) who were allegedly caught accepting bribe.
During the hearing on October 27 last year, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain, appearing for Meena, had said that "there was absolutely no willful disobedience" by the chief of Delhi's ACB who had acted in accordance with the law by not lodging an FIR.
The ASG had said the DDA officials were central government employees and the ACB did not have powers to take action against them. Hence, Meena had not disobeyed any law, he had said.
He had said the high court's judgement, holding the Lt Governor as the administrative head of Delhi and upholding the Centre's notification regarding the ACB's powers, has settled the law and thus "the contempt plea was infructuous".
Delhi government senior standing counsel Rahul Mehra had alleged that a sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) had caught the DDA officials red-handed and had gone to the ACB for lodging an FIR.
He had said that even the local police had refused to lodge an FIR in the matter inspite of an SDM asking them to do so and had let off the accused.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 11 2017 | 5:07 PM IST

Next Story