Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: rafique dada in Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation on 22 July, 2021Matching Fragments
- 15 - wp-1903-2021-J-22-7-2021.doc
19. In the wake of the aforesaid facts and pleadings, we have heard Mr.Rafique Dada, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner-State, Mr. Tushar Mehta, the learned Solicitor General of India and Shri Anil Singh, the learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondent-CBI, Mr. Subhash Jha, the learned counsel for the intervener-Mr.Ghanshyam Upadhyay, in Interim Application No. 1577 of 2021, and Dr.Jaishri Patil, the intervener-applicant in-person in Interim Application No. 1578 of 2021, at length. The learned counsels have also tendered written submissions in support of the submissions canvassed across the bar. With the assistance of the learned counsels for the parties, we have perused the material on record, including the copies of pleadings filed in the petitions before the Supreme Court and this Court, tendered across the bar.
20. Mr. Rafique Dada, the learned senior counsel commenced the submissions with an emphatic disclaimer that the petitioner-State is not averse to the investigation to be conducted by CBI, in conformity with the order of this Court. The State is, however, constrained to approach this Court on account of the flagrant transgression of the authority and jurisdiction by CBI and the consequent invidious infringement of the constitutional rights of the State under the federal structure. This foundational premise of the case of the petitioner was amplified by Mr. Dada by canvassing multi-pronged submissions.
(emphasis supplied)
51. Professedly without questioning the necessity of an impartial investigation, the State assails the investigation into the matters referred to in 4th and 5th unnumbered paragraphs on the premise that the Division Bench had not at all considered the issue, sought to be raised therein, and thus, the investigation is without jurisdiction. The linchpin of the
- 33 - wp-1903-2021-J-22-7-2021.doc submission of Mr. Rafique Dada was that in the order dated 5th April 2021, the Division Bench was extremely careful and cautious in defining and restricting the contours of preliminary enquiry and the consequent investigation, if required. The Division Bench did not deal with the petitions of Shri Param Bir Singh and Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay. The material which was explicitly stated to have been taken into account was the complaint of Dr. Jaishri Patil, to which the letter of Shri Param Bir Singh was annexed.
53. Mr. Rafique Dada would further urge that the fact that the transfers and postings of police officers, adverted to in unnumbered 5 th paragraph, was expressly excluded from the scope of inquiry by the Division Bench is underscored by the observations in the concluding paragraph of the said order, which reads as under :-
"87 We also make it clear that Shri Param Bir shall be at liberty to raise grievances, if any, in regard to transfers and postings of police officers and for enforcement of the directions in Prakash Singh (supra) before the appropriate forum in accordance with law, if so advised."