Eminent lawyer Prashant Bhushan has severely criticised the selection of Shri K.V. Choudhry, former chairperson of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) as the Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) to head the Central Vigilance Commission. It is noteworthy that in a meeting of the selection committee consisting of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Home Minister Rajnath Singh and the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha Mapanna Mallikarjun Kharge, which was held yesterday (1st June 2015), the ex-CBDT Chief K.V. Choudhry is widely reported to have been selected for the post of CVC, which is lying vacant for several months now. However, formal order of appointing him as CVC is yet to be issued since the President is on a foreign tour to Sweden.
Prashant Bhushan has tweeted that “Consensus between BJP & Congress to destroy CVC, the apex integrity institution by appointing a dubious & pliable person as its chief”. His tweet is reproduced below:
Consensus between BJP & Congress to destroy CVC, the apex integrity institution by appointing a dubious & pliable person as its chief.
— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) June 2, 2015
He has also released a letter that he had written to the Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 20th May, 2015, opposing the proposed selection of the ex-CBDT Chief Choudhry as CVC.
In his aforesaid letter dated 28 May, 2015, Prashant Bhushan had opposed the selection of K.V. Choudhry as CVC due to the following reasons:
(1) Name of K.V. Choudhry figures 4 times in the list of persons who visited former CBI director Ranjit Sinha at his official residence. Supreme Court on 14.05.2015 has said that Sinha’s meetings and impact of those meetings on cases being dealt with by the CBI, needs to be investigated.
(2) During the tenure of former CBI director Ranjit Sinha, role of Choudhry was investigated by the CBI in “stock guru” scam.
(3) Choudhry, who was chairman and member (investigation) of income tax, was apparently investigating the hawala dealer Moin Qureshi who repeatedly visited Ranjit Sinha.
(4) Choudhry was the then DGIT, Delhi, when the Radia tapes were intercepted and he did not take any action on evidence available with him.
(5) As in charge of 2G scam investigation in the income tax Department, Choudhry failed to make any headway in the case, unlike the other agencies like the CBI or the enforcement directorate (ED).
(6) Choudhry was also in charge of investigating HSBC account holders for almost 3 years. Until Supreme Court appointed the SIT, there was almost no progress in the income tax investigation under Choudhry. At the time the SIT was formed, income tax department had not filed even a single prosecution case against HSBC account holders.
(7) Serious adverse remarks have been made in the performance appraisal reports of Choudhry by three senior officers of CBDT.
(8) Choudhry probably reduced the “undeclared wealth” of M/s Flora and Fauna, a company of Ponty Chadha by over Rs. 200 crores.
In view of these reasons, Prashant Bhushan had requested the Prime Minister in the aforesaid letter to ensure that an dubious officer like K.V. Choudhry was not appointed as the CVC. He had also requested that the Government must place the names of all shortlisted candidates for the post of CVC in public domain so that people could inform the selection committee about any information concerning those persons.
Prashant Bhushan had also mentioned that the Central Vigilance Commission, in the absence of the Lokpal, is considered the apex integrity and watchdog institution of the country. Apart from overseeing the vigilance administration, CVC has also been tasked with superintendence over the CBI in corruption cases and for protection of the whistleblowers. He had also referred to the Supreme Court order dated 13/05/2015 which was passed after the Attorney General appearing for the Government of India had assured the Supreme Court that the Government would appoint the best person as CVC after following a credible and transparent selection process.
With the process of selection of CVC already having been completed, and only the formality of the order of appointment being signed by the President and being issued remains, it appears that the Central Government has already made up its mind (and, it appears that the leader of opposition, who belongs to Congress party may also have consented to it, though it is still not known whether he consented to this selection) on appointment of K.V. Choudhry as the Chief Vigilance Commissioner. If it happens, there is every likelihood that Prashant Bhushan may challenge the said appointment in the Supreme Court.
