Pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court dated April 30, 2013, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Director, Ranjit Sinha has filed a fresh affidavit in the matter of Common Cause & Ors v. Union of India & Ors. [WP (C) 4632012]..The CBI Director has admitted, in the affidavit, that certain changes were made in the draft report, and that these changes were based on the suggestions given by Law Minister Ashwani Kumar, Attorney General G E Vanahvati and officials of the PMO and the Coal Ministry..According to the 9-page affidavit, on March 6, 2013 the CBI was informed that the Law Minister desired to peruse the status reports. Accordingly, the reports were taken to his office where the draft status report pertaining to “Preliminary Enquiry 219 2012 E 0002” (PE 2) was perused by the Law Minister. The Law Minister made certain changes to it including the deletion of a sentence related to the scope of inquiry with respect to legality of allocation. Likewise, in a similar meeting held on the same day, the Attorney General “glanced through” portions of draft status report pertaining to PE 2 and “Preliminary Enquiry 219 2012 E 0004” (PE 4) and suggested certain minor changes to the status report of PE 2..The affidavit further states that a meeting was held later that day with Shatrughna Singh, Joint Secretary in the Prime Minister’s Office, and A.K. Bhalla, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Coal. Both of them perused status reports pertaining to PE 2 and PE 4 and suggested certain amendments including the removal of lines about the non-existence of approved guidelines for allocation of coal blocks..The CBI Director has emphasised in his affidavit that only a draft of the status report was shared with the political executive and the Attorney General, and not the final status report which it submitted to the court in sealed cover a few days later..Further, as per the affidavit, all the draft status reports were shown to (former) Additional Solicitor General Harin P. Raval and his assisting Advocate Satyakam for refining the language and bringing in more ‘clarity’ and ‘uniformity’..It has been further affirmed that the ASG was never instructed by the CBI to state in Court that the “Status Reports dated 08.03.2013 has not been shared with anyone and is meant only for the Court”..The CBI Director has also set out in the affidavit that it was .“initially intended that all changes brought about in this process shall be submitted before this Hon’ble Court in a sealed cover along with said Affidavit. This however could not materialize due to procedural requirements of the Registry. We were then advised…….that these details could be placed before this Hon’ble Court in sealed cover during the Hearing. This Hon’ble Court kindly allowed submission of sealed cover containing all relevant documents and took the same on record on 30th April, 2013”..The affidavit also discloses the nature of changes made and clarifies that there is nothing in the CBI (Crime) Manual governing the procedure to be followed for sharing status reports of ongoing investigation with third parties. It is also stated in the affidavit that the only directions that exist in this regard are the directions passed in Vineet Narain & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. [WP (Crl) 340-43/93] in an order dated March 1, 1996..The Court had earlier pulled up the CBI for failing to maintain independence during investigation while ASG Raval had resigned after accusing AG of making him a scapegoat. The matter is due to be heard on May 8, 2013.
Pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court dated April 30, 2013, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Director, Ranjit Sinha has filed a fresh affidavit in the matter of Common Cause & Ors v. Union of India & Ors. [WP (C) 4632012]..The CBI Director has admitted, in the affidavit, that certain changes were made in the draft report, and that these changes were based on the suggestions given by Law Minister Ashwani Kumar, Attorney General G E Vanahvati and officials of the PMO and the Coal Ministry..According to the 9-page affidavit, on March 6, 2013 the CBI was informed that the Law Minister desired to peruse the status reports. Accordingly, the reports were taken to his office where the draft status report pertaining to “Preliminary Enquiry 219 2012 E 0002” (PE 2) was perused by the Law Minister. The Law Minister made certain changes to it including the deletion of a sentence related to the scope of inquiry with respect to legality of allocation. Likewise, in a similar meeting held on the same day, the Attorney General “glanced through” portions of draft status report pertaining to PE 2 and “Preliminary Enquiry 219 2012 E 0004” (PE 4) and suggested certain minor changes to the status report of PE 2..The affidavit further states that a meeting was held later that day with Shatrughna Singh, Joint Secretary in the Prime Minister’s Office, and A.K. Bhalla, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Coal. Both of them perused status reports pertaining to PE 2 and PE 4 and suggested certain amendments including the removal of lines about the non-existence of approved guidelines for allocation of coal blocks..The CBI Director has emphasised in his affidavit that only a draft of the status report was shared with the political executive and the Attorney General, and not the final status report which it submitted to the court in sealed cover a few days later..Further, as per the affidavit, all the draft status reports were shown to (former) Additional Solicitor General Harin P. Raval and his assisting Advocate Satyakam for refining the language and bringing in more ‘clarity’ and ‘uniformity’..It has been further affirmed that the ASG was never instructed by the CBI to state in Court that the “Status Reports dated 08.03.2013 has not been shared with anyone and is meant only for the Court”..The CBI Director has also set out in the affidavit that it was .“initially intended that all changes brought about in this process shall be submitted before this Hon’ble Court in a sealed cover along with said Affidavit. This however could not materialize due to procedural requirements of the Registry. We were then advised…….that these details could be placed before this Hon’ble Court in sealed cover during the Hearing. This Hon’ble Court kindly allowed submission of sealed cover containing all relevant documents and took the same on record on 30th April, 2013”..The affidavit also discloses the nature of changes made and clarifies that there is nothing in the CBI (Crime) Manual governing the procedure to be followed for sharing status reports of ongoing investigation with third parties. It is also stated in the affidavit that the only directions that exist in this regard are the directions passed in Vineet Narain & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. [WP (Crl) 340-43/93] in an order dated March 1, 1996..The Court had earlier pulled up the CBI for failing to maintain independence during investigation while ASG Raval had resigned after accusing AG of making him a scapegoat. The matter is due to be heard on May 8, 2013.
