In a big relief for Arunachal Pradesh CM Pema Khandu, the Supreme Court disposed of an interim application seeking a CBI inquiry into cases of alleged corruption.
The Supreme Court was hearing an interim application filed by the Arunachal Justice Forum seeking “preliminary enquiry/investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation” against multiple allegations of corruption against the CM.
Earlier this year, Nabam Tagam, President, Arunachal Justice Forum, filed a Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 165/2021 against Pema Khandu, the Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh, in the Supreme Court of India.
He alleged multiple corruption cases against the CM, including having undisclosed properties, making several illegal appointments in the state, misappropriating funds, allotment of mineral and mining licenses to private companies without bidding, etc.
It must be pointed out that this isn’t the first time that the Khandus, the most powerful political family of Arunachal Pradesh, have been targeted with corruption charges. A PIL (No. PIL 52/2007) in the Guwahati High Court contained various allegations, primarily against then Chief Minister Late Dorjee Khandu (the father of Pema Khandu).
After giving a thorough hearing to both the parties, the High Court exonerated Late Dorjee Khandu of all the allegations labelled against him in its judgement dated May 12, 2010. The Gauhati HC’s judgement was challenged in the Supreme Court of India in form of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) by two persons: Rahul Agarwal Voluntary Arunachal Sena.
Manipur’s trouble with disputed Loktak eco-tourism projects
As both the SLPs were similar, they were tagged together, meaning that both would be heard together whenever taken up by the Court. Despite so many hearings, these SLPs are still pending in the Supreme Court.
On April 19, 2021, the Arunachal Pradesh Justice Forum’s writ petition was listed before the Supreme Court for an admittance hearing. However, the Supreme Court outrightly rejected the petition, asking it to be filed in the High Court of respective jurisdiction i.e. Guwahati High Court.
The petitioner then prayed before the Court that an SLP on similar allegations bearing No. SLP(C) No. 31233/2010 (Rahul Agarwal Vs State of AP) was pending in the Supreme Court. The SC allowed the Forum’s petition to be tagged with SLP(C) 31233/2010 without any order for issuing notices to anybody, meaning thereby that WP (Cr)-165/2021 of Arunachal Justice Forum was technically still not admitted.
However, Nabam Tagam filed an interim application in the writ petition (IA No. 59851/2021), praying the Hon’ble Supreme Court that while his WP(Cr)-165/2021 was pending, the Hon’ble Court may direct the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the allegation of corruptions as labelled in the writ petition (Cr)-165/2021.
This Interim Application (No. 59851/2021) was listed quite a few times in the tentative lists of cases to be taken up by Supreme Court, but somehow, got deleted when the final list came out. Therefore, the petitioner had to put a request to the Court to list it for hearing. It still got deleted once in the final list though listed in the tentative list.
Upon requesting the Court once again, the matter got listed on December 14, 2021, and heard by the Bench consisting of Hon’ble Chief Justice, Hon’ble Justice A.S. Bopanna and Hon’ble Ms Justice Hima Kohli.
Why is West Bengal opposed to increased BSF jurisdiction?
The Bench of above Hon’ble Judges observed that the main relief and interim relief prayed for are the same (i.e. the prayer in the WP(Cr)-165/2021 and the prayer in Interim Application or IA No. 59851/2021 are the same) and as such, there is no need to pass any interim order in the said application at this stage and therefore disposed of the case.
A legal expert who EastMojo spoke with said this was a victory for Pema Khandu. “This is like a victory for the Arunachal CM. The petitioner had asked for a ‘preliminary enquiry’ at the hands of the CBI which could have created a political ripple…however, this has made it clear that for now, he has nothing to worry.”
Another legal expert familiar with the subject but not authorised to speak with the media said, “When cases get tagged together, they are unlikely to come up for hearing because of logistical issues. This could be one of the reasons why the 2010 SC case is yet to move forward.”
Regarding the demand for CBI inquiry, the expert told EastMojo, “There is no concept of ‘preliminary inquiry’. If the CBI had been asked to get involved, it would have done so properly. In such an event, it is a good thing for the Arunachal CM that the SC has disposed of such a demand.”