Bombay High Court dismisses Param Bir Singh plea against Maharashtra Govt preliminary enquiries

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed the petition filed by senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Param Bir Singh challenging two preliminary inquiries initiated against him by the Maharashtra government (Param Bir Singh v. State of Maharashtra)..A Bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar held that observations in the order were confined to this petition and if Singh did approach the "appropriate forum" (Central Administrative Tribunal) the proceedings shall be decided by such forum "in accordance with law uninfluenced by any of the observations of the Court". .The Bench also added that the credibility of actions initiated against Singh can be adjudicated by the Administrative Tribunal."If the impugned action falls within the ambit of “service matters”, which is of wide amplitude, it is only the Tribunal, which as a Court of first instance, is empowered to delve into its legality, propriety and correctness." the order states..Singh challenged two preliminary enquiries initiated against him by the Maharashtra government over allegations of dereliction of duty, misconduct and corruption. In the petition filed through advocate Ajay Bhise, Singh claimed that the enquiries were an attempt to thwart the inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against the former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh. .The Maharashtra government, however, raised objections to the maintainability of the petition on two grounds:the grievances raised in the plea were covered under the Administrative Tribunals Act which could be raised before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT); andthe grievance pertaining to investigation being conducted by present Director General of Maharashtra Police Sanjay Pandey stood resolved on account of his recusal from the investigation..The Bench deemed it fit to first reserve the matter to decide on the maintainability of the plea before hearing the parties on merits..Senior Advocate Darius Khambata argued that the petition was a "complete bogus case" filed to "create a cloud to stop legitimate enquiries". He also contended that Singh could not claim immunity from investigations merely because he had made allegations against Deshmukh. .Calling it the "Param Bir Singh defence" Khambata stated that if this argument by Singh is allowed, then every person will claim immunity on the ground that some allegations had been made. "The allegations in the complaint are grave, and it is failed detailed. It has extraordinarily serious offences made out. No one is above the law. Not even the former Mumbai police commissioner," Khambata said calling the petition an abuse of process of law. .Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai appearing for Pandey adopted Khambata's arguments. He supplemented Khambata's submissions by arguing that, "there is a complete, adequate, alternate and equally efficacious remedy available to the petitioner (Singh)"..Opposing the submissions, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appearing for Singh argued that the preliminary enquiry was set up hastily and out of condemnation and vendetta. Jethmalani pointed out that instead of inquiring into the allegations against Deshmukh, the State government had "proceeded to punish the whistleblower (Singh)"To substantiate his allegation on malafides, Jethmalani contended that Pandey in conspiracy with the State had purportedly tried to compel Singh to withdraw the letter written to the Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray. .[Read order]