Did the Union Law Secretary Bat for Rakesh Asthana, CBI Officer Charged With Graft?

According to CBI DIG Manish Kumar Sinha, Union law secretary Suresh Chandra sought to soften up Sana Satish Babu, the prime complainant against Asthana – a charge Chandra denies.

New Delhi: While the most explosive aspects of CBI DIG Manish Kumar Sinha’s petition before the Supreme Court relate to the alleged payment of a bribe to a minister in the Narendra Modi government and the highly improper interference in a criminal investigation by national security adviser Ajit Doval, the alleged role played by the Union law secretary and cabinet secretary is no less damaging.

Sinha’s petition notes that even while central vigilance commissioner K.V. Chowdary was conducting his inquiry into the complaints CBI director Alok Verma and special director Rakesh Asthana had filed against each other, “[I]  became aware that … the Union Law Secretary Shri Suresh Chandra waded in to the issue.”

Also read: CBI Officer’s Explosive Petition: ‘Minister Paid, Doval Blocked Search for Evidence’

Sinha’s source for the role supposedly played by Chandra is the Hyderabad businessman Sana Satish Babu, whose allegations of extortion led to an FIR being filed against Asthana in the first place.

“On 8.11.2018, the office of Shri Sana was repeatedly approached by one Ms. Rekha Rani, IAS officer of Andhra Pradesh cadre, claiming that the Union Law Secretary, who is in London, wants to speak to Shri Sana. The London number of the Union Law Secretary was communicated.

“Shri Sana spoke to him on WhatsApp on the evening of 08.11.2018. The Union Law Secretary Shri Suresh Chandra said that he was in London for some work related to Nirav Modi case, that he was trying to contact him for last 4/5 days in order to convey message of Cabinet Secretary Shri PK Sinha that the Union Government will offer full protection to him, that there will be a drastic change on Tuesday (13th) and that he (Sana) should meet him (Suresh Chandra) on Wednesday(14th), that even IB is not able to track his (Sana) movement, that he also tried to communicate the message through one Chamundeshwarnath with whom he met in his London hotel. The call was ended by Sana promising to call him again later in the night.

“Once again Suresh Chandra enquired with Ms Rekha Rani on 13th November and asked her on presence of Sana. It appears that Shri Suresh Chandra was more forthcoming this time and requested Ms Rekha Rani to ensure that Sana be helpful, that all his future problems will be taken care of and that he should be brought to Delhi on Thursday or Friday i.e., 15/16.11.2018. This last (previous) sentence is as disclosed to Sana by Ms Rekha Rani.

“Shri Sana informed [me] herein and sought to know what action is to be taken. [I] had questioned Shri Sana on why Ms Rekha Rani was given the task of contacting him. He responded that the office of one of his companies has its office at a premises which are rented by Ms. Rekha Rani and that this detail is also available with Ministry of Corporate Affairs. He was worried but [I] told him that [I was] no longer supervising this case and that he should talk to present DIG and gave his official number.”

On Monday afternoon, The Wire spoke to Rekha Rani – she is currently commissioner (relief and rehabilitation) with the Andhra Pradesh government – to ask for her version of events.

Rani admitted to knowing Sana but added that she was no longer renting any premises from him. Asked whether Union law secretary Suresh Chandra had asked her to speak to Sana in connection with any matter, Rani said she needed time to “check with him” as she did not know what this was about. The Wire sent her a copy of Sinha’s petition and Rani promised to revert with answers but as of the time of publication she had yet to do so.

Chandra, by contrast, was forthcoming in his denial of all the allegations made by Sinha when The Wire read out the relevant portions to him.

Also read: Rakesh Asthana, Sushil Modi and PMO Worked Together to Book Lalu: CBI Director

“Yes, it is true that I am the law secretary and P.K. Sinha is the cabinet secretary but I do not know these people at all – Sana Satish or Rekha Rani”. He also denied being in London in November, though he said he did visit England earlier this year.

Chandra added that he had not been following the Alok Verma-Rakesh Asthana matter in the Supreme Court. The reason, he cited, was the reaction of the Supreme Court to news reports that the Union law minister in the Manmohan Singh government, Ashwani Kumar, had reviewed a coal scam case file prepared by the CBI.

The irony is that if Sana’s allegation, as reproduced in the Sinha petition, is correct, the law secretary would stand accused of a far more serious breach of official propriety. It also begs the question: on whose instructions were the law secretary (and cabinet secretary) acting, given that neither of the two officials is known to have any direct link to Asthana.

Sinha himself wants the Supreme Court to entrust the matter to a special investigation team:

The circumstances and the manner in which [I] was overnight removed from supervision of this case and transferred to a distant place thousand of kilometres away and the fact that the case involved [the] interest of some of the most powerful persons of the establishment, the present investigating officer of the said FIR may not be able to conduct a fair and impartial investigation, neither can one rule out the potent probability of the present or any subsequent IO being influenced or pressurised by the high and mighty who have been named in this application and in this case, thereby necessitating a court monitored SIT investigation to bring out the truth.

Therefore it is extremely imperative that the investigation of instant FIR be handed over to a Special Investigation Team monitored by this Hon’ble Court.

Sinha’s petition is listed for hearing on Tuesday, November 20.