The havoc ravaging the CBI was on display in Delhi High Court on Thursday when a law officer of the Centre turned up and claimed to be representing the federal agency even though a respected special public prosecutor was already doing so.

The lawyer who sought to appear in the case for the first time on Thursday is additional solicitor-general (ASG) Vikramjit Banerjee who, as a law officer of the Centre, can represent any government agency. The special public prosecutor fighting the case on behalf of the CBI since October 23, when the hearing began, is K. Raghavacharyulu.

The case in question brought out the significance of the attempt at intervention: the court was hearing a petition by benched CBI special director Rakesh Asthana to quash the bribery FIR against him.

On Wednesday, a lower court had granted bail to DSP Devender Kumar, who was arrested in connection with the same bribery case, after the CBI, represented by another counsel, decided not to oppose his bail application.

Devender is counted in the camp of Asthana, who is considered close to the Prime Minister. If the CBI, now under an interim chief picked by the Narendra Modi government, was planning to take the same stand in the high court when Asthana’s petition came up, there was a catch to it.

Special public prosecutor Raghavacharyulu has been appearing for the CBI in the case. Raghavacharyulu had been picked when benched CBI director Alok Verma was in charge. It was under Verma’s leadership that the bribery probe against Asthana had been initiated.

If someone feared that an adverse submission would be made against Asthana, the fear did not turn out to be misplaced.

The written submission filed by Raghavacharyulu said the FIR and the complaint “clearly disclose cognisable offences…. It is submitted that several incriminating documents and the role of several persons are under investigation.”

In the high court on Thursday afternoon, as the hearing on Asthana’s plea to quash the FIR was in progress, Banerjee, the ASG, entered the courtroom and told Justice Najmi Waziri that he had received instructions from the “competent authority” to represent the CBI.

A stunned Raghavacharyulu regained his composure and opposed the ASG’s appearance, informing the court that he had been appointed as special public prosecutor in the case by the CBI.

“I am the special PP appointed by the CBI in this case. He (Banerjee) is not authorised by the agency to represent the case,” Raghavacharyulu said.

The judge said: “There seems to be some confusion and it will be heard on the day of the next hearing.”

The court extended the interim protection from arrest to Asthana till November 14 and directed the CBI to maintain status quo till the next date of hearing.

Banerjee later told the court that he would seek instructions from “the competent authority” and make it clear to the high court who between the two would appear on the agency’s behalf.

The CBI opposed Asthana’s plea, saying the investigation was at a nascent stage and the allegations against the senior officer and others showed cognisable offences.

In the FIR dated October 15, the CBI had named Asthana as Accused Number 1 on the charge of demanding and taking bribes from a businessman who was under investigation in a corruption case linked to meat exporter Moin Quershi.

Hours before being benched last week along with CBI director Verma, Asthana had moved Delhi High Court with the plea to quash the FIR lodged against him.

“It is humbly submitted that the FIR and the complaint clearly discloses the cognisable offences…. It is submitted that several incriminating documents and the role of several persons are under investigation.”

The agency told the court that the probe was at the nascent stage and that it was handicapped in the investigation as certain files and documents were under the scrutiny of the Central Vigilance Commission, which is conducting a separate inquiry against Verma under the supervision of retired judge A.K. Patnaik. Asthana had alleged that Verma had indulged in corruption and later implicated him.

The Telegraph could not contact Banerjee despite repeated attempts.

Contacted, Raghavacharyulu said: “I have been appearing for the CBI from the first day of hearing in the case. I do not know the reason for his sudden appearance.”

After some time, when the judge took up the similar quashing petition of middleman Manoj Prasad, the ASG was not present at the hearing which invited the attention of the court, PTI adds.

When the court asked where the ASG was, Raghavacharyulu said his instruction was that he has to represent the agency.

The court interjected: “He (ASG) is also the counsel. If he has instructions to appear in this court, he will appear. Anyway, if he is not here, you (Raghavacharyulu) proceed.”

Raghavacharyulu told reporters outside the courtroom that he was appointed as the special public prosecutor to represent the CBI in the case following an official notification and claimed that there was no docket of CBI asking ASG Banerjee to appear in the matter.

“There is no confusion. At 2.15pm also, just before the hearing, I confirmed there was no docket by CBI asking the ASG to appear,” he said.