CBI goofed up with needless Maharashtra Governor’s nod to prosecute Ashok Chavan

New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation need not have gone to the Maharashtra Governors for sanction to prosecute former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan, who is now state Congress president, under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

This was the overwhelming view in the agency echelons, as also the legal opinion sought more than once, but it was the then CBI Director Ranjit Sinha who overruled all and pressed for the governor’s sanction. This, in turn, ultimately helped Chavan with the court quashing the Governor’s nod for want of fresh evidence that the CBI failed to furnish.

Sinha could not explain why he took a different stand in Chavan’s case and not one taken in the case of former telecom minister A Raja who was charge-sheeted by the CBI without seeking any sanction on the ground that he had by then ceased to be a public servant.

Also Read: Mumbai: Rajeev Satav likely to replace Ashok Chavan as MPCC president

The trial court, too, had framed charges against him without raising the question of sanction for prosecution. Sinha said he retired many years ago and, so, he does not remember the facts, but he must have decided on the basis of merits of the case and the legal opinion given to him. Incidentally, officers up to the level of then special director had repeatedly stressed in Chavan’s case that sanction is not needed.

Then special director V K Gupta had cited the opinion of the assistant legal adviser in his 3-page note that “retired officials as well as serving public servants and then revenue/chief minister will not get the benefit under Section 197 of the CrPC for the reason that entering into conspiracy and cheating are not part of discharge of their official duties.”

He went on to stress that “an act of cheating is not to be regarded as an act committed in the discharge of official duty….I am of clear view that sanction for prosecution under Section 197 is not required.”

The CBI went through the entire gamut of seeking legal opinions after Chavan protested that he was being prosecuted without taking sanction of the Governor, citing the instance of former Uttar Pradesh Chief Miniser Mayawati. The agency officials urged the CBI chief not to take cognizance of his complaint as the sanction in case of Mayawati was taken “under the direction of the special judge.”

He, however, wrote on the file that “we have to be certain of facts on the issue before comparing the instant case with that of Mayawati, which was also investigated by the CBI. He finally insisted that the CBI needed sanction of the Governor to prosecute and accordingly then Governor K Sankaranarayanan was approached who refused the same in 2013.

The CBI again sought sanction in 2015 when the Modi government had come to power on the ground that it had fresh evidence against Chavan. While acquitting Chavan, the High Court said: “It was permissible for hon’ble Governor (C Vidyasagar Rao), the sanctioning authority in the present case, to review or reconsider the earlier decision of erstwhile governor not to grant sanction, since the CBI had claimed that some fresh material had surfaced after the earlier sanction was refused.”

The “fresh material” that the CBI was referring to was a judicial commission report which was actually never tabled in the Maharashtra Assembly. As such, the High Court said: “The agency failed to present any fresh material capable of being converted into evidence that can be substantiated at the time of trial. Therefore, in the absence of fresh material, the sanction cannot be sustained and is quashed and set aside.”