Court Reprimands CBI Over Lethargic Approach in High-Profile Corruption Case
A special court in Mumbai has strongly criticized the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its lethargic approach in handling the corruption case against former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh and his two staffers. The court expressed serious concern over the investigation agency's failure to appoint a special public prosecutor for over six months, directly impacting the progress of the case.
Court's Strong Observations and Directions
Special Judge S R Navander did not mince words while addressing the CBI's representative during Tuesday's hearing. The approach of the prosecution is lethargic, the court stated, emphasizing that this serious lapse has prolonged the hearing on framing of charges. The court specifically noted that as per directions from the Supreme Court and High Court, cases involving Members of Parliament and Legislative Assembly (MP/MLA) must be tried expeditiously.
The court directed that a special public prosecutor must be appointed by the next hearing date on December 2. The judge made it clear that if the prosecution is serious about proceeding with the case, they must take effective steps immediately, or the court will pass necessary orders to ensure progress.
Background of the Corruption Allegations
The case involves serious corruption charges against Anil Deshmukh and his two staffers - Kundan Shinde and Sanjeev Palande. All three are facing charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, though formal charges are yet to be framed against them. The allegations center around instructions given for collecting bribes from bar owners across Maharashtra when Deshmukh served as the state's Home Minister.
The scale of the alleged corruption is massive, with the total amount involved estimated to be around Rs 100 crore. This case represents one of the most significant political corruption investigations in recent Maharashtra history.
Parallel Investigations and Current Status
In addition to the CBI case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a separate money-laundering case connected to the same allegations. Interestingly, dismissed police officer Sachin Waze, who sought and was granted pardon, has been made a prosecution witness in the CBI case while remaining an accused in the ED case.
Despite the seriousness of the allegations and the time that has passed since the cases were filed, the trial in both the CBI and ED cases has not yet begun. The repeated adjournments and procedural delays have raised questions about the pace of justice in high-profile political cases.
The court's strong remarks serve as a wake-up call to the investigating agencies about their responsibility to ensure timely justice, especially in cases involving public figures and serious corruption allegations that undermine public trust in governance.
