Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh has refuted the allegations against him and asserted that former Mumbai police commissioner Param Bir Singh made the claims to save himself as his involvement in the Ambani bomb scare case and Mansukh Hiran death case was getting clearer.
Deshmukh said he is going to file a defamation case against the former Mumbai police commissioner. He has also issued a point-by-point rebuttal of former Mumbai cop Param Bir Singh, who in his explosive letter to CM Uddhav Thackeray, accused Deshmukh of demanding Rs 100 crore collection from the police every month.
While the opposition has demanded the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader's resignation, his party members and alliance partners of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government have termed the matter as serious but have ruled out replacing him. Several other political leaders have also given their reactions.
Here's everything about Anil Deshmukh's letter
Anil Deshmukh, in his statement, has written that the unsigned letter of Param Bir Singh to CM Thackeray comes as a surprise. His assertions in the letter, if written by him and true, seriously implicate him for the allegations that he has made. Citizens may go through the untenable claims allegedly made by Param Bir Singh as below:
1. About the transfer: He contends that it was a routine transfer, and it was not for his dubious conduct. Section 22 N (2) specifically talks of 'exceptional cases' - and in the present case as per Param Bir, it was to conduct a free and fair trial of the Antilla Case.
Fact that section 22 N (2) talks of exceptional cases dubious conduct is included in this exception. Notings on file as indicated by Param Bir also indicate an exceptional case of ensuring free and fair investigation. By this very fact, it is clear that the presence of Param Bir as Commissioner of Police (CP) would have caused due harm to the investigation and hence is covered under the definition of dubious conduct.
2. Communications regarding misdeeds of State Home Minister: As Param Bir allegedly claims, he had briefed the CM and also NCP leadership - it is surprising why he did not put it in writing and as CP being fully empowered why he did not initiate action. Getting an FIR done does not require any sanction. This shows the allegations being made now are an afterthought.
3. Collection from hotels and bars and instructions to Vaze: Param Bir has alleged that it was in February, and as he says last several months it is presumed, he is talking of February 2021. If this being true, as CP Mumbai it was his duty to record this in writing and initiate or requite for enquiry.
Making this revelation now clearly shows that while the going was good, he never talked about it and now since he is transferred, he is raising this issue. It is surprising that the Home Minister who was in charge when Param Bir was made CP would wait so long as one year to make these suggestions of collections to Vaze.
About meetings and suggestions made to ACP Patil and DCP Bhujbal: Again, Param Bir lacked in his duty to report and respond till he was transferred. If this happened on March 4, as alleged by him, he should have brought this to the notice of CM or initiated action and reported it to Anti-Corruption. He is fully aware of the process as he himself was DG anti-corruption.
4. His message exchange with ACP Patil of 16th and 19th clearly shows how we wanted to build up this plot after his transfer. It is surprising why he needs a confirmation form ACP Patil when he himself says that he was informed by ACP Patil and Vaze both in February and March. Need to get this message as an exhibit is to try to build evidence after his transfer.
5. Home minister calling officers: Home Minster is fully empowered as head of the department to call any officer for discussion and meetings. In fact, Param Bir raising these issues clearly amounts to insubordination. As about the targets, Param Bir is making an allegation without supporting facts and dates... so this too calls for behaviour unbecoming of a police officer and make Param Bir libel for departmental action.
6. Mohan Delkar Case: Here Param Bir's logic of not registering a case in Mumbai is completely against CRPC. Cognisance of the case has to be taken where the incident took place this was the same complication which was also created in Sushant Singh case which led to Maharashtra government getting a lot of flak both in media and by the judiciary. In fact, his not obeying legal directions amounts to insubordination and needs to be enquired into departmentally.
7. Non-existence of any proof against Param Bir: His assertion here is premature as both investigations on the planting of explosives and murder of Hiren are far from over.
8. Extraneous and vindictive: This allegation for extraneous reasons is a wild allegation without substantiation by a member of the police force and liable for action.
Similarly vindictive is also not borne out by the alleged letter except for not registering Delkar case which is actually illegal on part of Param Bir -- no other case of vindictiveness is made out and hence is liable for action against Param Bir for insubordination and making false allegations against the head of the department.
Following the rebuttal, Deshmukh has also listed out a series of action Param Bir Singh now faces after his letter to CM Thackeray. Anil Deshmukh's statement further adds that from the allegations made, Param Bir is liable for:
A. Departmental action for insubordination- and behaviour unbecoming of a police officer
- Where he admits not registering suicide case in Mohan Delkar case.
- His questioning the authority of HM in calling officers and giving directions.
- Making false allegations of vindictiveness and extraneous reasons and putting them to the media.
- Also, false fabrication of evidence in a purportedly criminal case of illegal demand of money as per WhatsApp messages.
B. Criminal action for
- Not reporting/initiating the matter pertaining to demand of money shows his being complicit in the alleged crime within the provisions of Prevention of Corruption act for attempted abetment of illegal gratification without reporting the same.
- For not registering a case of suicide in Mohan Delkar case as per provisions of 166A (c) for refusing to register an FIR.
Deshmukh further said: Citizens demand immediate action --
1. Param Bir be placed under suspension as per provisions of Rule 3 of All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969.
2. Departmental action be initiated, and also criminal action be proposed as mentioned above- criminal action will look into details of all the allegations of demand as alleged by Param Bir.