ASG Satya Pal Jain wrote a letter to the Chandigarh administration asking them to go soft on the officers who were looking into a property dispute case.
New Delhi: A top law officer in the Narendra Modi government and former Chandigarh MP Satya Pal Jain sought to influence an inquiry against two police officers for failing to conduct a fair and proper investigation in a 2016 property dispute case, revealed an RTI on 29 June.
In January 2017, Jain, additional solicitor general of India, wrote to the advisor of the Chandigarh administration forwarding a representation to “stop the vigilance inquiry” related to a complaint by surveyor in general insurance companies Shiv Shakti Sharma. Asking for a “sympathetic consideration”, Jain requested the Chandigarh administration to pass necessary orders in the case.
The inquiry pertains to a May 2016 case when Shiv Shakti Sharma’s rented showroom in Chandigarh was allegedly robbed.
Shiv Shakti Sharma alleged that the police colluded with the owner of the showroom, businessman Jagdish Bansal, to dispossess him of his property. Having failed to register an FIR, Sharma then approached the Vigilance Branch.
“When I went to complain about the fact that my shop had been ransacked, I was immediately told that Suresh Kumar would look into my case. But the police didn’t register an FIR so I approached the court. Instead, they filed an affidavit stating that I never ran a shop in the building,” Sharma told ThePrint.
The Vigilance Branch report found the two police officers in-charge — Baljit Singh, SHO at the time of the incident, and ASI Suresh Kumar — guilty of misusing their power and favouring the accused. The report also said that “amicable” phone calls were exchanged between the officers and the accused on the day of the incident.
The RTI, filed by activist Pradeep Sharma, revealed that on 15 November, 2016, the superintendent of police (crime) directed strict action against Singh and Kumar. An FIR was finally filed by the police in December 2016 and Bansal was charged under sections 454 (breaking into a house) and 380 (trespassing) of the IPC.
A month later, Jain wrote the letter to the city administration.
The vigilance report indicting the two officers was forwarded to the director general of police, Chandigarh, in June 2017. A regular departmental inquiry was initiated against the officers but is still pending.
‘Normal to forward representations’
Speaking to ThePrint, Jain first claimed that he couldn’t remember the case or the complainant referred to in the letter. However, he later confirmed that he had forwarded and signed the letter.
“It is normal for us to forward representations, especially since I’m an ex-member of parliament from Chandigarh. Jagdish Bansal’s brother, Rajiv Bansal, came to me with the request,” said Jain. “I have contested four Lok Sabha elections from Chandigarh. It is my duty to know people in my constituency. I have known him for several years. I simply forwarded the representation, haven’t kept tabs on the case since.”
“All I have said is that necessary action must be taken. The representation is not a request to stop the vigilance inquiry; that is not what I am saying. There is no case of corruption or dereliction of duty here. It was a simple property dispute,” said Jain.
Contentions
However, activist Pradeep Sharma said Jain is a senior officer of the law and is supposed to champion the cause of the government. “It is appalling that he can do this. How can a custodian of the law write such a letter,” he asked.
Shiv Shakti Sharma alleged the property he was occupying was sold for nearly Rs 2.5 crore after he was dispossessed.
“Whether you call it corruption or nepotism or incompetence, such people are clearly not fit for these services. What is the use of such a government? I could have taken on Bansal, but I was fighting a battle on multiple fronts,”Shiv Shakti Sharma said.
The case is still under investigation and pending in the Punjab and Haryana high court.