You are here: Home » PTI Stories » National » News
Business Standard

Is CBI Director 'untouchable' for his actions, asks SC

Press Trust of India  |  New Delhi 

Does the have such protection that neither the Centre nor the CVC can touch him for his any action during the fixed tenure of two years?

This question arose on Thursday in the which was hearing the petitions filed by and others challenging the Centre's decision to divest him of all powers and sending him on leave along with Special Both have levelled allegations of against each other.

When senior advocates Fali Nariman and Dushyant Dave, appearing for Verma and an NGO, Common Cause respectively, argued that neither the Centre nor the (CVC) had any power to take disciplinary action against the Director, headed by asked: "Will that not make virtually untouchable? Is that what Parliament intended?"

"Does the fixed tenure of supersede all rules and makes him untouchable?", asked the bench, also comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph.

These questions cropped up while Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CVC, was justifying the action taken against the

Though Verma, according to the Centre remains the CBI Director, Additional P S Narasimha appearing for the CBI, submitted that there was no need to go to the before taking disciplinary action against Verma.

Nariman and others opposing the Centre's decision took the stand that action against the can be taken only by the high-level panel, comprising the Prime Minister, of the opposition and the of India, involved in the selection process.

The hearing also saw Asthana's counsel and taking the stance that a direction be passed to take the CVC enquiry report against Verma to its logical conclusion.

Rohatgi, who was before K K Venugopal, told the apex court that Asthana was a whistle-blower in the case, but was painted by the with the same brush and sought a direction to the Centre that it should take the CVC's preliminary inquiry against Verma to a logical end.

"My assumption is that the CVC report is adverse in part to the gentleman (Verma). The Central should take this report to logiocal end," Rohatgi said.

Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mallikarjun Kharge, referred to the legal provisions and said that on these allegations the could have come to the and asked the panel to "please transfer Verma".

"Please don't give this handle to the Government to suspend or divest of power any CBI authority. This will affect the independence of the CBI and will render the Vineet Narain judgment toothless," Sibal told the bench.

He argued that a 'transfer' actually amounts to a public casting of doubt on the "That's why legislature has drawn a ring fence around transfer by introducing the prior approval of the panel."

Further, he said CVC's powers of supervision over CBI extend to cases alone and that is the extent of the CVC Act.

When Nariman was asked by the Bench "If the situation arises, can the court appoint a CBI Director, he said: "Yes, in its inherent powers, it can."

When Sibal concluded his arguments, Dave in a lighter vein, said "Mr Sibal says he won't want to exercise this power when he is the Home Minister".

Sibal was quick to respond, "As if I am not already in enough troubles.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

First Published: Thu, December 06 2018. 20:50 IST