MK Sinha claims Ajit Doval’s interference in probe against Rakesh Asthana

CBI Joint Director MK Sinha, in his petition filed before the Supreme Court, claimed that National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval interfered in the investigations against CBI Special Director Rakesh Asthana and even blocked a search to be carried out at Asthana’s residence.

Bringing more facts in light, MK Sinha alleged that the two middlemen involved in the case were close to Doval. He further alleged that the complainant in the case, businessman Sana Sathish Babu, had told him that Union Minister of State for Coal and Mines Haribhai Parthibhai Chaudhari had been paid bribes to the tune of several crores of rupees for alleged help in matters related to CBI.

Sinha’s petition also said that surveillance had stumbled upon a conversation involving R&AW officer Samant Goel, where he was heard saying that “the PMO had managed the CBI issue”, and that same night the entire CBI team probing the Asthana case was removed.

Sinha also claimed that Sana Sathish Babu had met CVC KV Chowdhary in the Moin Qureshi matter and that Union Law Secretary Suresh Chandra had contacted him (Sana) on November 11—while the SC-mandated CVC probe into the CBI battle was going on—and tried to influence him.

It is to be noted that MK Sinha, who supervised the bribery probe against Asthana and was among officers transferred en masse in October.

As per the report published in The Indian Express, following are the claims of MK Sinha in his petition filed in Supreme Court.

In his petition, Sinha stated, “As per Manoj Prasad (the middleman arrested in the case against Asthana), Shri Dineshwar Prasad, father of Manoj and Somesh, retired as Joint Secretary, R&AW and has close acquaintance with the present National Security Advisor Shri Ajit K. Doval (“NSA”). This was one of the first things Manoj claimed on being brought to CBI HQ and expressed complete surprise and anger as to how CBI could pick him up, despite his close links with the NSA Shri Doval.”

As per the petition, Prasad claimed that recently “his brother Somesh and Samant Goel, helped the NSA Shri Ajit Doval on an important personal matter”.

Sinha further claimed that “India opted out of a contest from INTERPOL” for a delegate at Lyon, France with Joint Director AK Sharma as a nominee. “The elections were to be held sometime in 3rd week of November this year. Sometime in September, Shri AK Sharma was to go to abroad for a meeting but at the last minute, his trip was abruptly cancelled. It was informed that India is tacitly withdrawing from the contest,” the petition reads.

Sinha also said in the petition that following the registration of an FIR against Asthana on October 15, CBI chief Alok Verma told the NSA on October 17. “Subsequently on the same night, it was informed that the NSA has informed Shri Rakesh Asthana about registration of FIR. It was informed that Shri Rakesh Asthana reportedly made a request to NSA that he should not be arrested,” the petition added.

He also claimed that when investigating officer of the case AK Bassi asked for permission to take in possession the mobile phones of the Special Director and for a search to be conducted, “the Director CBI did not give immediate permission and reverted that the NSA has not permitted the same”.

On October 22 this year, the petition reads, the request was put on record to the Director, but it was again not allowed. “Upon being queried, the Director/Petitioner herein replied that he was not getting clearance from the NSA/Shri Doval,” the petition says.

Sinha has claimed in his petition when searches were conducted at DySP Devender Kumar’s house on October 20, CBI Director asked him to stop it. “…the Applicant …asked the Director, to which the Director replied that this instruction has come from NSA Shri Doval,” the petition noted.

Sinha further claimed that after the arrest of Manoj Prasad, Bassi received a call from a DCP of the Special Cell of Delhi Police which he did not pick. “Later, another Inspector of Special Cell called up and sought to know if Manoj has been arrested. Enquiries revealed that the query had originated from Cabinet Secretariat,” the petition added.

Referring to the conversation of Samant Goel, snooped on by CBI, Sinha alleged that it was the PMO which directed the ouster of CBI top officers on October 23. “On 23.10.2018, the Applicant herein was informed by DIG/DD (SU) that someone spoke to Samant Goel and asked to help him to which Samant Goel replied that things have been managed with PMO and everything is fine. The same night the entire investigating team was shifted,” Sinha has said in his petition.

However, without mentioning any context to the present case under supervision of the Supreme Court, the petition has made a mention of alleged bribes received by MoS Haribhai Chaudhary.

“Sometime in first fortnight of June 2018, a few crores of rupees was paid to Shri Haribhai Parthibhai Chaudhary, presently Minister of State for Coal and Mines in Government of India. As per Shri Sana, Shri Haribhai had intervened with the Senior officers of CBI through the office of the Minister of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension [“MOS (P)”], to whom, apparently, the Director – CBI reports to. The money was paid through one Vipul of Ahmedabad. These facts were disclosed by Sana to me on 20.10.2018 in the forenoon. I immediately reported the matter to the Director and the AD (AK Sharma),” the petition read.

The petition further says that following the SC entrusting the probe into allegations of bribery against Alok Verma and Asthana—in both cases Sana Sathish Babu’s statement is key—attempts were made to influence the key witness and complainant. He has said that repeated attempts were made by Union Law Secretary Suresh Chandra to reach Sana.

“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),” the petition highlighted.

Sinha also said that Sana had earlier called-on CVC KV Chowdhary in the Moin Qureshi case and the latter had even checked with Asthana about the evidence against Sana.

“Sana also disclosed that he met the CVC Shri KV Chowdhary alongwith one Gorantla Ramesh somewhere in Delhi and that they discussed Moin Qureshi’s case. Subsequently, the CVC called Shri Rakesh Asthana to his residence and made inquiries. Shri Rakesh Asthana informed to the CVC that there is not much in evidence against them,” the petition added.

Sinha has claimed that during interrogation of Manoj Prasad, it was revealed that he had met Nitin Sandesara of Sterling Biotech in London. He has claimed in the petition that the exchange of messages between Manoj and Sana “corroborate the instances of bribery mentioned in the complaint”. It does say, however, that there “was no specific mention of the name of any Public Servant in any of the Whatsapp messages stored in the phone”.

“DIG/Deputy Director (Special Unit, CBI) also informed that the analysis of tower location of the Cell Phone used by Shri Somesh in India revealed that on 16.12.2017, tower location of mobile of Somesh was at Pandara Road, New Delhi during day time and evening hours and at the CGO Complex, New Delhi during very late evening hours. CGO complex is the same place where the offices of the CBI and R&AW is located,” the petition noted.

“Further, it was informed that even on 15th late evening, tower location of mobile of Shri Somesh was at CGO complex. It was also shared by DIG/DD SU, that Somesh was in frequent touch with Samant Goel during Somesh visit to Delhi on 15th,16th and 17th December 2017. Examination of Shri Sathish Sana had revealed that purportedly he was made to hear the voice of Shri Rakesh Asthana on 15th or 16th December 2017,” Sinha’s petition stated.

It has told the court that Sinha’s transfer “is arbitrary, motivated and malafide, and was made solely with the purpose and intent to victimise the officer as the investigation revealed cogent evidence against certain powerful persons”. Sinha has also sought remedial measures from the court.

Also Read: CBI vs CBI: Exiled Alok Verma responds to Supreme Court on CVC report