Rakesh asthana ips biography of christopher

  • Rakesh Asthana is a 1984-batch

    • Verbal spat in court in CBI vs CBI case

    NEW DELHI: A verbal spat broke out between current and former investigating officers (IO) Satish Dagar and Ajay Kumar Bassi respectively in a Delhi court during the hearing in the CBIvs CBI bribery case on Friday.
    Special CBI Judge Sanjeev Aggarwal during the last hearing had directed the investigating officer (IO) Ajay Kumar Bassi to appear before the court on Friday to explain the case diary maintained by him.
    Bassi briefed the court about the investigation done by him earlier in 2018.
    Bassi told the court that there were clinching evidences against former CBI special director Rakesh Asthana, but current IO did not even seize Asthana's phone and other electronic evidence.
    "On a made up case, clean chit has been given to the public servant. He should have seized the mobile phones," Bassi said.
    The contentions in the case diary were opposed by the current officer, Superintendent of Police Satish Dagar.
    He said, "Bassi refused to join investigation on two occasions. Now, he is making personal allegations."
    The judge retorted saying, "There is no point washing dirty linen in public. You both worked in the same organisation, which is bigger than an individual."
    The court will now hear the matter on March 7.
    The CBI on October 15, 2018, had registered an FIR against Asthana for allegedly accepting a bribe from an accused probed by him in return for ensuring relief and a clean chit in the case. He was, however, given clean chit earlier this month.

    Why appoint Rakesh Asthana, the 1984 batch IPS officer from Gujarat cadre, as Delhi Police Commissioner with four days to go before his retirement? ‘As a special case in public interest’ is what the Home Ministry notification says.

    The former Police Commissioner of Surat has also been given a one-year service extension. Good governance practice? And why was he not appointed as CP in June, 2021 when SN Shrivastava retired and Balaji Srivastava was given additional charge of Delhi Police Commissioner?

    What happened between June and July? In June he was not under consideration. By the end of July, he is the Delhi Police Commissioner, normally chosen from the AGMUT (Arunachal-Goa-Mizoram-Union Territory) cadre.

    Moreover, just in May, the Centre was actively considering appointing Asthana as Director of CBI. His name was dropped from the list of candidates only after Chief Justice of India N V Ramana reportedly insisted on following the apex court’s guidelines issued consequent to former IPS officer Prakash Singh’s PIL calling for police reforms which bar appointing IPS officers with less than six months as residual service to head police forces. With Leader of the Opposition Adhir Ranjan Chaudhary supporting CJI Ramana’s arguments, PM Narendra Modi, part of the selection panel, is learnt to have acceded, saying the rule of law would be followed.

    The Gujarat IPS officer has arguably been controversial. In 2018, when posted as Special Director in CBI, he was involved in an ugly spat with the then CBI Director Alok Verma, after which the government sent both of them on leave. Verma had ordered a PE (Preliminary Enquiry) against Asthana on a complaint by businessman Sathish Sana who claimed that Asthana had received a Rs 3 crore bribe from him while he was being investigated in a money-laundering case against controversial Hyderabad-based exporter Moin Qureshi. But Verma was replaced as CBI Director in a ‘midnight coup’ while Asthana was absolved of the charges and r

  • Rakesh Asthana is accused of accepting

    • Court asks CBI why Rakesh Asthana wasn’t put through lie detector

    The CBI had registered an FIR against Asthana on the basis of a complaint from Hyderabad-based businessman Satish Babu Sana, facing investigation in a 2017 case involving meat exporter Moin Qureshi. Sana’s allegations of bribery against Asthana had triggered a war within the CBI, particularly between then director Alok Verma and his number two, Asthana.

    Story continues below this ad

    Special Judge Aggarwal asked CBI investigating officer Satish Dagar, “Did you subject Rakesh Asthana to lie detector test and psychological test ?” Dagar replied, “No.”

    The judge asked, “Why, Sir, if there is a 164 statement (Sana’s statement under CrPC Section 164)?” Dagar said, “There is no direct interaction in the (Section) 164 statement.”

    The court said, “After going through the chargesheet, which I have done…you have been giving too much indulgence to the person…”

    Special Judge Aggarwal also said that after going through the chargesheet co-accused Sunil Mittal appears like a fictional James Bond character “M”: “You have pounced upon your own IO (investigating officer). You have plucked the low-lying fruit. It was easy.”

    Story continues below this ad

    The judge had read out contents of the chargesheet and asked the CBI, “What about calls made to RA [Rakesh Asthana] through WhatsApp? The complainant, Sana Satish Babu, has said this in his 164 statement. What is the reason to disbelieve his statement until he steps into the witness box?”

    HC dismisses plea challenging appointment of Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner

    The petitioner had prayed for quashing of the July 27 order issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs appointing Asthana as the Delhi Police Commissioner, and also the order granting inter-cadre deputation and extension of service to him

    The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a PIL challenging the appointment of Gujarat-cadre IPS officer Rakesh Asthana as city police commissioner.

    ADVERTISEMENT


    The order was pronounced by a bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh on a petition by lawyer Sadre Alam.


    The petitioner had prayed for quashing of the July 27 order issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs appointing Asthana as the Delhi Police Commissioner, and also the order granting inter-cadre deputation and extension of service to him.


    Also Read: 'Personal vendetta under PIL cloak': Rakesh Asthana on challenge to his appointment

    “The impugned orders (of MHA) are in clear and blatant breach of the directions passed by the Supreme Court of India in Prakash Singh case as respondent no.2 (Asthana) did not have a minimum residual tenure of six months; no UPSC panel was formed for appointment of Delhi Police Commissioner; and the criteria of having a minimum tenure of two years has been ignored,” the plea had submitted.

    The Centre, in its affidavit, has said that the appointment of Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner and the extension of his service tenure was done in public interest, keeping in mind the diverse law and order challenges faced by the national capital, which have national security implications as well as international and cross border implications.

    This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or