India News

Supreme Court rejects plea challenging appointment of Nageswara Rao as CBI interim chief

Published

8 years ago

February 19, 2019

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court today (Tuesday, Feb 19) refused to examine the manner in which M Nageswara Rao was appointed interim CBI director, when the full-time director Alok Verma was removed in January, and rejected a petition challenging his appointment.

A Bench led by Justice Arun Mishra and also comprising Justice Navin Sinha, said a regular CBI Director has already been appointed. The court also refused to delve into the issues of more transparency raised by NGO and petitioner, Common Cause.

The petitioner said the government had “completely bypassed” the statutory requirement to consult the high-powered selection committee of the Prime Minister, Opposition Leader and the Chief Justice of India before appointing Rao as interim head of CBI.

Rao had first been appointed as interim CBI chief when the Centre and CVC had, in a controversial post-midnight decision on October 23-24 divested then CBI director Alok Verma of his responsibilities. This order was later quashed by the Supreme Court.

Later, when the selection committee mandated for appointing the CBI director dismissed Verma from office, within 48 hours of his reinstatement to the post by the apex court, on January 10, Rao had been brought back as interim chief of the premier investigation agency.

Don’t expect miracle from me, members should strengthen party: Priyanka Gandhi

The NGO and activist Anjali Bhardwaj had termed the January 10 order of the government handing over the charge and work of the CBI Director to Rao as “illegal”.

The petitioners had argued that Rao’s appointment was done in violation of the rules set for appointing the CBI director and that the selection committee, comprising the Prime Minister, Chief Justice of India and Leader of Opposition (or the largest opposition party) in Lok Sabha had not met to discuss and clear his appointment.

The selection committee had, on February 2, cleared the appointment of former Madhya Pradesh Director General of Police and 1983 batch IPS officer Rishi Kumar Shukla as the new full-time director of the CBI.

The petition challenging the manner in which Rao was appointed said, “The Government of India has attempted to stifle the independence of the institution of the CBI by appointing the Director of the CBI in an arbitrary and illegal manner.”

It said the mandatory requirement under Section 4A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act of 1946 to consult the high-powered selection committee was a statutory measure to make the appointment process of the CBI Director free from government interference.

Two Surya Kiran aircrafts collides in mid-air in Bengaluru, 1 pilot dead

“The DSPE Act as amended by the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 provides for the appointment of the CBI Director by a high-powered selection committee which does not have a preponderance of the government and its representatives. The committee consists of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and the Chief Justice of India or any Judge of Supreme Court nominated by him,” the petition said.

Besides, it argued that Rao’s earlier appointment as interim CBI Director following the ouster of Alok Verma on October 23 was quashed by the Supreme Court in a judgment on January 8. Yet the January 10 order has stated that the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet approved the appointment of Mr. Rao “as per the earlier arrangement”.

“The October 23 order making Mr. Rao interim CBI Director was quashed by the Supreme Court on January 8 for violating the procedure for appointment of CBI Director as defined in the DSPE Act… However, the government still invoked its earlier order which had been quashed, to once again make Shri Nageshwar Rao Interim Director of the CBI even though it was not the competent authority and did not have any powers to make the appointment,” the petition said.

Lack of transparency in the appointment of the CBI Director allows the government to exercise undue influence in the appointment process especially at the stage of short-listing of candidates, the petition said.

However, the course of the proceedings in the petition was full of drama. To begin with, three Supreme Court judges – Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice AK Sikri and Justice NV Ramana –recused from hearing the case one after the other. The case was finally listed before the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra.

During one hearing in the case, Attorney General KK Venugopal had told the court that Rao’s appointment as the interim chief had been approved by the selection committee. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the petitioner, had taken to Twitter to claim that Venugopal had tried to mislead the court. Bhushan said that he had spoken to Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge, one of the three members of the selection committee, who confirmed that Rao’s appointment was not discussed by the panel.

Former BJP leader Kirti Azad joins Congress

Venugopal had then sought contempt proceedings initiated against Bhushan and reiterated before the court that Rao’s appointment had the selection panel’s approval. A decision on whether Bhushan should be held in contempt is still awaited.

Rao’s actions as the interim CBI director had also come in for judicial reprimand during the pendency of this petition. Earlier this month, in an unprecedented move, Rao, still an additional director with the CBI and among the agency’s top three officers, was found guilty of contempt of court and penalized with a fine of Rs 1 lakh and detention within the courtroom of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi for a day, for transferring senior CBI official AK Sharma despite an embargo imposed by the Supreme Court on his transfer.

Sharma was heading the probe into the Muzaffarpur shelter home case. However, his proximity to axed CBI director Alok Verma and frosty ties with tainted former CBI special director Rakesh Asthana, a close confidante of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, had led to Rao transferring him soon after Verma was moved out of the agency. In his hurry to move Sharma and other officers close to Verma to new, relatively less important roles, Rao forgot that the Supreme Court had imposed an embargo on transfer of all CBI officers who were part of the team – Sharma being the head of this probe – investigating the Muzaffarpur shelter home case. The top court held Rao in contempt for violating its orders.

On Tuesday, as the court dismissed the petition challenging Rao’s appointment it refused to address the other key question raised in the plea – that of the need for greater transparency in the appointment process for the CBI director (or interim director).

The bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha simply held that a full-time CBI director had already been appointed; hence it needn’t interfere with the appointment of Rao whose contested stint as interim CBI chief had already ended.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Up Next

Bikaner administration ordered Pakistan nationals to leave within 48 hours

Don't Miss

Two Surya Kiran aircrafts collides in mid-air in Bengaluru, 1 pilot dead

India News

Four militants killed as rival Naga groups clash in Manipur village

Four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga groups at Taodaijang village in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday.

Published

9 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

At least four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga militant groups in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday, November 4.

The exchange of fire took place at Taodaijang village in the Khoupum area of the Naga-majority district. According to officials, the cadres involved were suspected to belong to rival Naga militant outfits, including the Zeliangrong United Front-Jenchui (ZUF-J) and the Zeliangrong United Front-Kamson (ZUF-K).

Initial reports indicated that the gunfight continued for several hours, leaving three cadres of ZUF-J and one cadre of ZUF-K dead.

The bodies of the deceased militants were subsequently recovered by local residents.

Residents appeal to armed groups to stop firing

Following the gunfight, local residents, including women, reached the spot in an attempt to prevent further violence between the rival groups.

They also used a public address system to appeal to the armed cadres to stop firing and prevent the situation from escalating further.

Further details about the circumstances surrounding the clash were awaited.

Manipur government reviews security situation

In a separate development, Manipur Chief Minister Yumnam Khemchand Singh directed senior security officials to identify active armed groups suspected of involvement in recent incidents of violence in the state.

The directive excluded groups engaged in peace talks with the state government.

The Chief Minister issued the instructions during a review meeting on the state’s law and order situation on Tuesday night.

He also asked security agencies, including the Army and central paramilitary forces, to submit a detailed report on the involvement of the suspected groups.

The Chief Minister said the state Cabinet could consider declaring such groups unlawful if their involvement in violence against innocent civilians was established.

He also emphasised that necessary action would be initiated against groups continuing to perpetrate violence against civilians.

India News

Agnipath scheme gets 2-year extension for Agniveers, tenure may rise to 6 years

The Centre has introduced a two-year extension for the remaining 75% of Agniveers under the Agnipath scheme, creating another opportunity for them to seek enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Published

12 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

The Centre has introduced a significant change to the Agnipath recruitment scheme, offering a two-year extension to Agniveers who were earlier expected to leave the armed forces after completing their initial four-year service.

Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General NS Raja Subramani announced the decision on Wednesday following a Union Cabinet meeting. Under the revised arrangement, the 75% of Agniveers who were not initially selected for absorption into the regular armed forces will be offered an additional two-year engagement period.

The development creates another opportunity for these personnel to continue serving in the armed forces beyond their original four-year tenure.

What changes under the revised Agnipath scheme?

Under the original Agnipath framework, Agniveers were recruited for a four-year service period, including training. At the end of this tenure, up to 25% of each batch could be selected for permanent enrolment into the regular armed forces, while the remaining 75% were expected to return to civilian life.

The revised arrangement introduces an additional two-year engagement for the latter group. This means their potential service period could increase from four to six years.

The extension also creates another opportunity for Agniveers to seek enrolment into the regular armed forces after completing the additional two years.

What happens after the additional two years?

According to General NS Raja Subramani, Agniveers completing the extended engagement period and willing to continue serving will be considered for enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Their selection will be based on objective criteria.

This creates an additional pathway for those who are not absorbed into the regular forces after their initial four-year tenure. However, the revised arrangement does not mean that every Agniveer will automatically receive permanent enrolment.

Why has the decision been taken now?

The announcement comes as the first batch of Agniveers recruited under the scheme approaches the completion of its initial four-year service period.

The Agnipath scheme was introduced on June 14, 2022, to recruit personnel into the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force for a fixed four-year engagement.

General Raja Subramani said the scheme had been undergoing periodic reviews, with the performance of Agniveers being continuously evaluated. He also indicated that feedback on their performance had been very positive.

The latest Cabinet decision creates an additional route for retaining personnel beyond the initial engagement period.

What was the original Agnipath arrangement?

Under the original framework, the armed forces could retain up to 25% of Agniveers in the regular cadre after their four-year service period, subject to selection.

The remaining 75% were to complete their engagement and transition to civilian life.

With the latest revision, this group will receive an additional two-year engagement opportunity before being considered for enrolment into the regular armed forces under the prescribed selection criteria.

The change therefore modifies the earlier arrangement by providing an additional opportunity for Agniveers to continue their military careers.

India News

Hardeep Singh Puri set to win Rajya Sabha bypoll unopposed

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to be elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Madhya Pradesh after the returning officer rejected the nomination papers of two independent candidates.

Published

17 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to enter the Rajya Sabha unopposed from Madhya Pradesh after the nomination papers of two independent candidates were rejected during scrutiny on Tuesday.

The two candidates whose nominations were rejected were Kante Sayanna and Rajkumar Lohani, the latter being backed by the Congress. Their rejection leaves Puri as the only candidate in the contest for the vacant Rajya Sabha seat.

According to an official, the result will be announced on November 5, which is also the last date for withdrawal of nominations.

The Returning Officer, Umesh Sharma, examined the nomination papers on the last day of scrutiny and rejected the two independent candidates’ applications.

Objections raised against Hardeep Puri’s nomination

The nomination papers submitted by Puri also faced objections from the two independent candidates and Congress leader Hemant Katare.

They questioned the validity and completeness of Puri’s affidavit filed in Form 26, raising concerns over whether the mandatory details had been properly furnished.

However, after examining the objections, Returning Officer Umesh Sharma concluded that Puri had not violated any requirements under the Representation of the People Act.

Sharma stated in his order that no defect had been found in Puri’s nomination papers that could justify their rejection.

Following the decision, Katare and Congress MLA Atif Aqeel announced that they would approach the court against the order.

Calling the decision an attack on Indian democracy, the Congress leaders said in a statement that Puri’s nomination should have been rejected despite what they described as significant errors.