The Supreme Court on Monday decided to appoint one of its former judges to probe allegations of a security lapse during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent Punjab visit but asked the Centre to halt all inquiries and disciplinary proceedings against state officials.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana expressed strong displeasure at the Centre’s issuance of showcause notices to Punjab officials despite the highest court being seized of the matter.
“All the inquiries have to be stopped,” Justice Ramana told solicitor-general Tushar Mehta, who was representing the Centre.
The name of the former Supreme Court judge who will head the probe committee is expected to be announced on Tuesday. The panel will include the registrar-general of Punjab and Haryana High Court, director-general of the National Investigation Agency and the additional DG (intelligence), Punjab.
Modi had skipped a rally in Punjab on Wednesday after being stuck on a flyover for 15-20 minutes, purportedly because of a farmers’ protest. Central government and BJP leaders have alleged a security breach and a threat to Modi’s life in the Congress-ruled state.
On Friday, the apex court had orally asked the Centre and the Punjab government to halt their parallel probes and decided to take cognisance of the matter.
But on Monday, the Punjab government complained that the Centre had issued seven showcause notices to its official, including the chief secretary, director-general of police (DGP) and the senior superintendent of police, Bathinda.
Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, the other judges on the bench, posed sharp questions to the Centre.
“Mr Mehta, why was the showcause notice issued? The impression (is that) by issuing the showcause notice, you show that you have decided how you will go ahead. So why should this court go into the matter at all?” Justice Kohli asked.
Justice Kant underlined that the DGP and the chief secretary were both respondents before the court in the matter.
“We will come to know who is responsible for the lapse. The state and the petitioner want a fair hearing and you cannot be against a fair hearing. So why this administrative and fact-finding inquiry by you at all?” Justice Kant asked.
Mehta said the Centre was following the “blue book” (manual relating to SPG security).
The bench said: “Yes, there is a breach and the state too has admitted it. But the other issues are questions of fact and it has to be seen by an independent person.”
When Mehta persisted, Justice Ramana said: “If you want to take disciplinary action against the state officers, then what remains for this court to do?... If the main issue of putting the blame on someone is over... then what do we do?”
Mehta said the government would desist from taking any disciplinary action, pending the report of the court-appointed committee.
Punjab advocate-general D.S. Patwalia said on behalf of the showcaused Punjab officials: “No opportunity of hearing has been given to me. I will not get a fair hearing from the central government. Please appoint an independent committee and give us a fair hearing…. Showcause notice presumes and premeditates everything against us.”
