Mumbai: HC bench from Judge Nitin Jamdar and Kotwal’s nest on Thursday told the state to show some “respect” to the Sameer Wankhede ranking officer.
Wankhede petition said, “The material about the records shows that members of the ruling regime / government in the state of Maharashtra, including but are not limited to the Minister of Sitting the State Government and members of political parties (which are part of the government), have released the Tirade open against the Applicant and Has / has “said a decision” through television interviews, Twitter and other social media that the Petitioner was guilty of corruption violations and therefore every “investigation” carried out by any country agency was eliminated by Fides Mala, and would be the dirty abuse of the principles of free inquiry and fair, if it is not the persecution institutionalized by the state.
“Furthermore,” The Mala Fides, Motive Mutiious and Ulterior to hurt the applicant by involving it in false cases was reflected by recurrent statements made by politicians, including ministers in the state government as far as making wild and stable accusations Ono involves members of the Petitioner’s family, including his father and sister.
“Senior Adviser Atul Nanda, with the Advocate Ramiza Hakim, appeared for Wankhede, told the court that he was the director of Zonal NCB and was investigating a case.” He is not a drug vendor, “Nanda said.
The country has also formed a special investigation team (sitting) To investigate Wankhede on several accusations.
Nanda said both CBI or Nia had to conduct an investigation, but the vilification must be stopped.
“I was personally attacked by the state.
My worries are that the country will catch me every day.
I want temporary protection in the form without coercive help, “Nanda told HC, added” I saw the design in my post.
I consciously not took any name because I wanted to keep the legal majesty.
“He quoted part 17a from the prevention of corruption law, which, he said, gave a previous sanction from the center per central government official, but the state had set up to investigate him.
HC asked Nanda,” If the law itself protects you, Why do you want to protect from the court? “Nanda replies that under the law, the state cannot investigate and” if the state violates its duties and exceeds the limits, the court can step and protect me if my rights tend to be violated.
They might catch me today.
“Pai said,” The petition is premature.
We have received four applications, which are also against personal individuals, including witnesses, Kiran Gosavi.
We only conduct a preliminary investigation.
So far we haven’t registered the FIR against Wankhede.
“When HC asked PP to the rights based on Part 17 A, PAI replied,” We are investigating Gosavi’s individuals.
Don’t know what happened.
He (Wankhede) asked for blanket protection.
I need time to answer.
“Pai says part 17 A will be an image when FIR is archived.
Ask HC,” What is the sequuous? “PP said,” It is very difficult for Maharashtra State to make any statements.
“He took another time to negotiate with the officer in court.
Pai finally said the state would provide 72 hours notice to Wankhede in the prevention of corruption act cases.
Nanda said the concern was that the country could then capture Wankhede in the IPC case, and the petition will become an infructugia.
The HC bench views PP and said it was true.
Nanda said the notification was given for “3 A clear working day “to allow his client to close to the appropriate forum.
HC asked him whether he had responded to the call he got.
Nanda said he was present and asked by NCB (who conducted a separate investigation of alertness) for 3 hours.