Mumbai: Bombay High Court extends interim protection to Sameer Wankhede

In a significant development the Bombay High Court granted extension of the interim protection until June 8 to controversial IRS officer Sameer Wankhede dealing a major setback to the Central Bureau of Investigation CBI as the CBI had requested an additional two weeks to submit its replyOn Monday the Narcotics Control Bureau NCB filed a response before the court asserting that there were no violations of the law in Wankhedersquos case and that the necessary sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was obtained within the prescribed 21day period During the previous hearing Wankhedersquos counsel argued that the fourmonth time limit had elapsed and deemed the FIR registered by the CBI as illegalNCB responseldquoThe departmental enquiries conducted by the Narcotics Control Bureau by following the due process of law and the principles of natural justice which were under the CCS Conduct Rules1965 and the Report submitted by the SET dated 25102021 is different from the criminal action being undertaken by the CBI which are simultaneous proceedings having no effect andor bearing on the other Further the NCB has obtained the requisite prior approval under Section 17A on 11052023 which is within 3 months from the date of application ie 20042023 Hence there is no bar of Section 17A in present caserdquo SIC reads the response of the NCB filed before the courtAlso Read Drugsoncruise case Let Sameer Wankhede prove manipulation charge against us says SITIn its reply the NCB has also highlighted the details of its vigilance report which talks about various irregularities by its Mumbai office and Wankhede while handling the Cordelia Cruise case and accused Aryan Khan The affidavit filed by the NCB also has details of Wankhedersquos assets and his foreign trips on misdeclared expensesDuring Mondayrsquos proceedings senior advocate Aabad Ponda represented Wankhede and highlighted that the CBI had been investigating the case since October 25 2021 with the formation of a special enquiry team at that time Ponda emphasized that the enquiry had been ongoing for over one and a half years making Section 17A applicable in this situation He further stated that Wankhede had received a Section 41A notice under the Code of Criminal Procedure CrPC and was fully cooperating with the investigation thereby negating the need for his arrest However the public prosecutor representing the CBI argued that granting Wankhede interim relief would be prejudicial claiming he would not cooperate and might tamper with evidence The CBI also assured the court that if an arrest were to be made they would provide appropriate reasons for itlsquoDidnrsquot leak chatsrsquoAdditionally the public prosecutor raised concerns about Wankhede leaking chats with the father of one of the accused It was revealed that the father had communicated with Wankhede about his son who was in Wankhedersquos custody The prosecutor alleged that Wankhede was now using these chats to establish his own innocence The court questioned Wankhedersquos actions of leaking chats while the matter was still subjudice and directed him to refrain from making any statements or releasing any further chats that could hinder the ongoing investigation Ponda speaking on Wankhedersquos behalf refuted the claim that he had leaked any chats asserting that the press had accessed them from his petition filed before the courtPonda further asserted that Wankhede had taken action against influential individuals who are now attempting to retaliate He explained that the chats were included in the affidavit due to corruption allegations made against Wankhede Ponda highlighted that the father of the accused Shahrukh Khan himself referred to Wankhede as an upright officer and discussed the reformation of his son Ponda questioned the logic behind such statements stating ldquoIf any money was asked why would the father call him an upright officerrdquoAfter hearing arguments from both sides the court decided to extend the protection granted to Wankhede until June 8 while directing the CBI to submit its reply by June 3Wankhede on Monday has given a written complaint to Mumbai police commissioner alleging that he and his family have been receiving threats on social media and he needs protection as he fears for his life