New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday admonished former CBI Director Ranjit Sinha for his "completely inappropriate" meetings with coal scam accused in the absence of investigating officers (IOs), saying "further inquiry is necessary" to ascertain the fairness and impact of his conduct in the coalgate probe.
"We need not comment on the opinion of Sinha expressed through his counsel Vikas Singh except to say that even if Sinha is right, there cannot at all be any justification for him to meet any accused person in a criminal case where investigation is underway, without the investigating officer being present, whether it is in his office or as alleged by Prashant Bhushan, at his residence and that too, allegedly, several times including late at night," a bench headed by Justice M B Lokur said while questioning Sinha's conduct.
The apex court sought the assistance of the Central Vigilance Commission to determine the methodology for conducting such an inquiry on whether his meetings with the accused had any impact on the investigations and subsequent charge sheets or closure reports filed by the CBI, and sought its response by July 6.
The court, which examined the documents including the office notes and entry register of Sinha's residence showing him meeting even at midnight with coal scam accused, held that those did not fall in the category of Official Secrets Act and "disclosures made by the whistle blower were intended to be in public interest".
It also dismissed Sinha's plea for action of perjury against advocate Prashant Bhushan or the NGO Common Cause and its official for making false and misleading allegations saying "the file notes speak for themselves and any interpretation, even an allegedly twisted interpretation said to have been given to them, cannot fall within the realm of perjury".
The bench, which noted that Sinha met several accused including Rajya Sabha MP and industrialist Vijay Darda, said it is not necessary to examine whether the probe into the case of the Dardas was in any manner influenced by him at any point of time.
"What is of importance is that as justice must not only be done but it must also appear to have been done. Similarly, investigations must not only be fair but must appear to have been conducted in a fair manner.
"The fact that Sinha met some of the accused persons without the IO or the investigating team being present disturbs us with regard to the fairness of the investigations.
"This is all the more so if we keep in mind the fact that in the 2G scam investigations, this Court had concluded in its order of November 20, 2014 that Sinha should not interfere in the investigation and prosecution of the case relating to the 2G spectrum allocation and to recuse himself from the case. That an SIT was not ordered in the 2G spectrum case is not relevant," the bench, also comprising Justices Kurian Joseph and A K Sikri, said.
It said a view was taken that Sinha should be directed not to interfere in the investigations in that case and that, coupled with his meeting accused persons in the coal block allocation case without the presence of IOs, "is enough to persuade us that some further inquiry is necessary to ensure that the investigations have been fair in the coal block allocation cases where Sinha has had one or more meetings with one or more accused persons."
The bench also rejected the CBI arguments by terming them "fallacious" saying that any adverse order in the matter would irreparably damage its credibility.
"If an independent inquiry shows that the CBI has acted fairly, it will enhance its institutional credibility and its image.
"On the other hand, if the independent inquiry shows that Ranjit Sinha managed to influence some specific investigations in the Coal Block Allocations case, it will serve the larger public interest and will enable the CBI to take appropriate corrective and remedial measures," it said.
"Either way, through an independent inquiry the CBI will be the beneficiary rather than the loser," the bench said.
The NGO Common Cause had sought investigation by SIT on alleged scuttling of the probe into coal block allocation scam by Sinha.
While disposing the application in this regard, the bench said "we are of the opinion that it is not at all necessary for us, nor is it advisable at this stage, to enter the thicket of allegations made by Common Cause with regard to the investigations relating to the Dardas or the alleged attempt by Sinha to scuttle the investigations with regard to one or more of the accused persons in that case.
"What is of greater importance and what has caused us considerable concern is that neither Sinha nor the CBI denies that Sinha had met some persons, including the Dardas, who are accused of criminality in the Coal Block Allocations case without the IO or the investigating team being present," the bench said.
The bench said if at all Sinha as the CBI Director had to meet any accused person for obtaining his point of view on the allegations against him, he should have done so in the presence of the IO or the investigating team.
"The fact that Sinha admittedly met some accused persons in the absence of the investigating officer or the investigating team is itself a cause for concern," it said.
The bench said here is a very high degree of responsibility placed on an investigating agency to ensure that an innocent person is not subjected to a criminal trial.
"This responsibility is coupled with an equally high degree of ethical rectitude required of an investigating officer or an investigating agency to ensure that the investigations are carried out without any bias and are conducted in all fairness not only to the accused person but also to the victim of any crime, whether the victim is an individual or the State," the bench observed.
