Rakesh Asthana is “trying to mislead the Court”: Another CBI DSP joins the fray

Adding to the list of petitions and applications preferred by members of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), an impleadment application has been filed in the Rakesh Asthana matter by another officer..DSP SS Gurm has filed the application seeking to be impleaded in the case, so as to place before the Delhi High Court “relevant materials” and “important facts” apropos the case..In his application, Gurm contends that Asthana is seeking to mislead the High Court by selectively placing relevant facts before it. It is also apprehended that the CBI is trying to protect Asthana, and may not effectively contest the petition filed by him..Gurm had registered the FIR against Asthana on October 15, based on a complaint made by Sathish Babu Sana that the Special Director of the CBI had accepted illegal gratification to the tune of Rs. 3 crore. He shows that the registration of the FIR was done in compliance with the law, contrary to Asthana’s claims that it was marred by the non-compliance of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.As per this provision, the question of prior approval from the competent authority before conducting any investigation into an alleged offence committed by a public servant would arise only when the said offence is relatable to any decision taken by the public servant in discharge of his official functions or duties. Gurm contends that this case has nothing to do with the discharge of a public servant’s functions..He also points out that the CBI had consulted Additional Solicitor General PS Narasimha on whether Section 17A of the PC Act shall be retrospectively applicable and whether prior approval of the competent authority is required before registration of the FIR. Narasimha had opined that there is no requirement of obtaining sanction of the competent authority under Section 17A if an investigation has already commenced on the date of coming into force of Section 17A..The application also brings up the issue of the conflicting versions of the statements made by the complainant. Whereas the statement made by Sana on October 4 implicates Asthana, the October 20 statement as produced by Asthana alleges that it was CBI Director Alok Verma who demanded illegal gratification from Sana..“…the version pleaded by Shri Rakesh Asthana is factually incorrect and that the prosecution story is factually correct.”.Gurm further states that the evidence on record points to a “clear, cogent and an unmistakable link between Shri Sathish Babu Sana to the Prasad Brothers to Shri Samant Goel (Special Director R&AW) and culminating at Shri Rakesh Asthana.”.Therefore, it has been prayed that Gurm be impleaded as a party to the litigation before the Delhi High Court, and that the petition filed by Rakesh Asthana be dismissed with costs..After the infighting among CBI officers snowballed, Rakesh Asthana had moved the Delhi High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR filed against him by the CBI. The High Court, on the last date of hearing, had directed that status quo be maintained until the next date of hearing..Asthana has also moved the Supreme Court challenging the CBI order which directed that he be placed on leave..On his part, Alok Verma filed a petition in the Supreme Court, alleging that Asthana stymied decisions which were crucial to the investigation of certain cases..Yesterday, another CBI officer AK Bassi filed a petition before the Apex Court challenging his transfer to Port Blair after investigating the complaint filed against Asthana..Read the application: