New Delhi, Jan 11 (IECurrentAffairs) “Alok Verma doodh ke dhuley nahi hae (Verma is no sacred cow),” was how a BJP leader had commented on October 23, 2018 — when in a late night development the former CBI Director was ordered to proceed on forced leave.
Over 75 days later as Mr Verma has been now finally given the marching orders from the country’s anti-corruption probe agency, it has come to light that the high profile police officer was found on the wrong side of law vis-a-vis his handling of cases pertaining to an officer close to Lalu Prasad Yadav, acquisition of land in Gurgaon and his complicity in meat exporter Moin Qureshi’s case.
According to BJP sources, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in its report placed before the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-headed high powered panel among other things also alleged that Mr Verma was trying to ‘bring in tainted officials into the CBI.
There were also allegations from CVC that the outgoing CBI Director often kept the files away from the CVC, which has supervisory role over the CBI.
Sources said among other things, the panel was presented with papers pertaining to telephonic interceptions by spy agency RAW vis-a-vis Mr Verma’s alleged involvement in high profile cases.
One of the reports mentioned that in controversial meat exporter Moin Qureshi’s case, Mr Verma did not allow to make Hyderabad-based businessman Sathish Babu Sana an accused in the case despite CBI probe team making such a request.
Interestingly, Sana had also made allegations of corruption and extortion against onetime Special Director CBI, Rakesh Asthana.
In October, the government was compelled to act after Mr Verma and Mr Asthana accused each other of corruption.
The BJP sources have also said that Mr Verma had tried to save ‘an officer’ in the IRCTC case who was supposed to be close to former Railway Minister and ex-Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad.
In October last year, BJP leaders pointed out that the CVC also made it clear that Mr Verma declined to cooperate with the supervising body under the provisions of Section 8 of the CVC Act, (2003) of superintendence over the functioning of the DPSE (CBI), related to the investigation of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
During the day, the government also issued a statement that – “Despite repeated assurances and reminders, the Director, CBI failed to furnish the records or files before the CVC”.