In a major setback for the government, the Supreme Court has reinstated CBI chief Alok Verma. The court said Verma, who was sent on forced leave, could not be stripped of his powers but added that he could not take major policy decisions till talks with the Selection Committee. The Centre had taken a decision against Verma and CBI’s Special Director Rakesh Asthana after their feud become public as they made allegations of corruption against each other.

Supreme Court rules against government’s decision. Alok Verma couldn’t have been stripped off his powers, says Justice Kaul. Verma has been reinstated but “can’t take major policy decisions till the decision of the selection committee”.

The Supreme Court quashes the orders of CVC and DoPT divesting Alok Verma. The High Power Committee under DSPE Act to act within a week to consider his case. Verma has to be reinstated. But till final decision of statutory committee, he cannot take major policy decision.

Reading out the verdict authored by CJI Ranjan Gogoi, judge SK Kaul says the CBI director has to be the role model of the agency’s independence. “Public interest is paramount in ensuring independence of the CBI,” the verdict says.

On Alok Verna’s pleas, Supreme Court said that the government should have referred to the Select Committee consisting of the Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister and Leader of Opposition to initiate Verma’s removal.

CBI Director Alok Verma, who was divested of his duties and sent on a forced leave, had earlier dismissed all the allegations levelled against him by special CBI director Rakesh Asthana and called them nothing but the “imagination of the petitioner”. In an affidavit filed in the Delhi High Court last year, Verma also said there was “highly incriminating materials” found against Asthana and a thorough probe was necessary against him to restore public confidence in the investigative agency. The affidavit was in response to Asthana’s challenge to the FIR filed against him by the CBI and the decision to strip him all of his responsibilities in the HC. The affidavit further claimed that there was “cogent evidence of bribery against Asthana” and the government’s approval was not required before lodging the FIR against him.

Full Judgment:

[embeddoc url=”https://legaldesire.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018__Judgement_08-Jan-2019.pdf” download=”all”]