New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (December 11) sought the response of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on a plea seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged quid pro quo in the donations through electoral bonds to various political parties.
A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while saying that the plea filed by Sudip Narayan Tamankar did not seem to be bonafide and was pushing a “roving and fishing inquiry”, told the CBI counsel to seek instructions.
This appears to be a roving and fishing inquiry: High Court
“You are building edifice on quid pro quo. This appears to be a roving and fishing inquiry. This is seeming to be a petition that is without any material. This does not seem bona fide,” the bench said.
The CBI counsel objected to the maintainability of the plea.
“The scope of the petition is limited. Complaint is made. Reject it if you want. Take instructions. We are not telling you how you deal with a complaint,” the bench told the CBI counsel, news agency PTI reported.
Apex Court in August dismissed a batch of pleas seeking court-monitored investigation
The Supreme Court earlier in August dismissed a batch of pleas, including one filed by Tamankar, seeking a court monitored investigation by a SIT into the quid pro quo arrangements between public servants, political parties, company official and officials of the investigative agencies, as disclosed by the electoral bond data, saying it would both be premature and inappropriate.
“At the present stage, absent a recourse to the remedies which are available under the law to pursue such grievances, it would both be premature and inappropriate for this court; premature because the intervention of this court under Article 32 of the Constitution must be preceded by the invocation of normal remedies under the law and contingent upon the failure of those remedies; and inappropriate because the intervention of this court, at the present stage, would postulate that the normal remedies which are available under the law would not be efficacious,” the apex court said while dismissing the pleas.
Apex Court in February struck down Electoral Bonds Scheme
A five-judge Supreme Court bench in February scrapped the Electoral Bonds Scheme declaring it unconstitutional. It had directed the State Bank of India (SBI), which was the authorised financial institution under the scheme, to share the data with the Election Commission of India, which was directed to disclose the information provided by the SBI. Following the order of the top court, the SBI made the data public.
