Mumbai: Kuldeep Patil, counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Monday indicated in Bombay high court on Monday that the Bureau may arrest Sameer Wankhede, former zonal director of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in connection with the Cordelia cruise drug bust case. He made this statement while opposing any blanket protection from arrest.
The High Court on Monday extended till June 8 interim relief from coercive action against IRS officer and former NCB zonal director Sameer Wankhede in an FIR registered by the CBI in Cordelia cruise drug bust bribery case and restrained him from interacting with the media in relation to the case.
Bench asks Wankhede to go to CBI office as & when called
A vacation bench of Justices Abhay Ahuja and Milind Sathaye has also asked Wankhede to attend the CBI office as and when called by the investigating officer. The bench has asked Wankhede to file an affidavit by the end of the day stating that he will abide by the conditions.
The court clarified that the relief granted to him was conditional – he is not supposed to publish any material by way of WhatsApp or any other mode on the subject matter in the petition or investigation; not give press statements; and tamper with evidence in any matter whatsoever. The bench has asked him to give an undertaking and submit the affidavit on the same by the end of the day today.
Wankhede's petition
The HC heard a petition filed by Wankhede seeking quashing of the FIR registered by the CBI alleging that he was being targeted and he had kept his seniors in the loop at every stage. He has also contended that the law mandates that the probe against him should have been completed within 4 months as per 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). He contended that the four months from October 2021 have lapsed.
During the hearing, CBI counsel Patil informed the bench that Wankhede had circulated certain chats with actor Shah Rukh Khan which he had enclosed in his petition. The chats were exchanged between Wankhede and the actor when the latter's son Aryan Khan was arrested in the drug bust case.
Judge slams Wankhede for circulating chats when matter was subjudice
Expressing displeasure, Justice Ahuja asked, “When the matter was subjudice what was the need for circulating the chats? When you have subjected yourself to this court, why did you go to the media?”
Wankhede’s advocate Abad Ponda assured the court that the officer had not circulated any chats. He added that what was in the media was only the chats annexed to the petition and nothing beyond it. “I have not gone to the media. I did not share. It (chats) is limited to the petition. What is beyond the petition is not in the media.”
Patil argued that Wankhede was supposed to attend to the investigating officer as and when summoned and not transmit any messages to the media or to any other person with respect to the subject matter of the FIR. If he did this, arrest may not be required, he added.
Patil, however, urged the court not grant any "blanket protection" to Wankhede, as it “may come in the way of any arrest or action that CBI would want to take under 41 of CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure)”. That order (of relief) cannot be indefinitely continued, added Patil.
An affidavit was filed by Kapil, Superintendent Vigilance, Ministry of Home Affairs, who is authorised to file an affidavit for the NCB which denied all contentions and claimed that Wankhede was “making a mountain out of a molehill”.
They claimed that the Special Enquiry Team (SET) had been constituted to enquire into the procedural lapses in the investigation and violation of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. (CCS Conduct Rules) That report showed prima facie commission of criminal offences under the PC Act and Indian Penal Code.
SET report
The SET report was sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs on April 24, and on May 11, the MHA addressed a letter for prior approval against Wankhede, the affidavit read.
Thus, NCB clarified that their departmental enquiries were different from the criminal action being undertaken by CBI which are simultaneous proceedings and have no effect or bearing on each other.
The NCB affidavit also pointed out procedural irregularities found in the investigation of the 2021 Cordelia Cruise drug bust case. The affidavit also pointed out the disproportionate assets belonging to Wankhede and his wife.
The NCB affidavit stated that there is an enquiry being conducted by the NCB against Wankhede in an alleged Disproportionate asset case.
a. The Petitioner has intimated to have spent Rs82,87,399 on one flat at Goregaon valued Rs2,45,49,918. His declaration of this property is different in his statements and documents tendered by him. The source and amount of this transaction needs detailed enquiry
b. It can be seen that as per ITR of two FY i.e. 1-4-2018 to 31-3-2020 of Petitioner his income is Rs31,55,883 & his wife's income is Rs 14,05,577 and their total income was Rs45,61,460 only whereas the expenditure on the two unreported transaction of Maldives Trip alone was Rs7,25,000 and buying of the expensive Rolex worth Rs22,05,000 amounts to Rs29,30,000.
c. The Petitioner has stated that his wife had invested Rs1.25 Crores in one of their flats before their marriage. Their date of marriage is 08.02.2017. The ITR of FY 2016-17 has not been provided by them, thus the source of the money that has been used to pay the Rs1.25 crore. is not clear.
Highlighting the details about the Misconduct & violations of CCS (Conduct) Rules by Wankhede amongst others which are as follows:
a. That he made private foreign visits with family and mis-declared the expenses.
b. The Petitioner purchased a Rolex Gold watch of MRP Rs22,05,000 for Rs17,40,000, on credit and there are Multiple Invoices/Quotes of Rolex watch.
