Himachal: CBI probe to continue into Negi's death case

Hindustan Times

15 hours ago

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe will continue into the death of Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited chief engineer-cum-general manager Vimal Negi as the double bench of the Himachal Pradesh high court on Thursday refused to interfere with the decision to transfer the investigation to the CBI, terming that part of the plea as non-maintainable.
Though a division bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma partial relief to superintendent of police Sanjeev Gandhi has accepted the plea only to the extent that it pertains to the personal and professional reputation of Gandhi and the other SIT members, stating that their professional standing should not be undermined.
The division bench while hearing Gandhi's Letters Patent Appeal (LPA), refused to 'modify' and interfere with the transfer of the probe to the CBI, but issued notices to all respondents, including the Union of India, the CBI, the State of Himachal Pradesh and the family of the deceased, on the issue of personal and professional remarks made against Gandhi and the Special Investigation Team (SIT) he had constituted.
The High Court has now issued notices to all parties involved in the original proceedings, the Union of India, CBI, State Government, and the deceased's family on the limited issue of personal and professional comments in the earlier order.
The next hearing is scheduled for July 14, and respondents have been permitted to file replies in the meantime.
The court held that observations made by Justice Ajay Mohan Goel in its order of May 23, against Gandhi, as supervising authority of the SIT, were not maintainable to the extent that they impacted his service record.
The court, however, refused to interfere with the decision to transfer the investigation to the CBI, terming that part of the plea as non-maintainable. It reiterated that a central agency probe is warranted to ensure crucial evidence and witness statements are preserved.
Gandhi's counsel, advocate Sanjeev Bhushan while speaking to reporters said, 'Our concern is professional reputation. We had investigated the matter diligently and honestly. Remarks based on reports that were never shared with us should not stand uncontested.'
He had earlier argued in the court that certain references to the status reports by the DGP and ACS (Home), adopted by the single judge, 'unfairly tarnished his image'. He had submitted that the status report filed by the then Director General of Police and the report by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) had not been shown to Gandhi or the SIT, and no opportunity was provided to respond.
Sanjeev Gandhi, currently on medical leave, has filed a Leave Petition in his personal capacity before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, challenging the May 23 single bench order that transferred the investigation into the mysterious death of Negi to the CBI.
Gandhi through the petition has urged the high court to modify the order passed on May 23 be ordered to be 'modified to the extent that instead of handing over the investigation may be very kindly be ordered handed over to SIT being constituted by high court rather than handing over to CBI or central agency which is under control of UoI in order to avoid any conflict of interest.'
Negi went missing on March 10 and his body was recovered from Bhakra Dam in Bilaspur on March 18. Kiran Negi, the deceased's wife, moved the high court on April 9 seeking a CBI probe which was allowed on May
23.
Through the petition Gandhi said that as the affidavit filed by DGP HP 'was with ulterior motivate therefore the scathing observations
qua the investigation based upon the said affidavit may be set aside and the contents of the said affidavit may be set aside.'
The high court while allowing petition seeking CBI investigation on May 23, had observed, 'If the Director General of Police of the state himself has a concern about the fairness of the investigation, then even if this investigation is being carried out by the SIT in right earnest, it shall never instill confidence whatever may be the report of the SIT.' 'This court is of the considered view that in this case, there is an exceptional situation, which requires that the matter be investigated by the CBI,' ruled the high court while allowing the petition seeking CBI investigations.