VIJAY DEO JHA
Ranchi, Sept 20: BJP MP Nishikant Dubey has approached the Delhi High Court against its ex parte decision to stay the hearing of the disproportionate asset case against JMM chief Shibu Soren by the Lokpal. The court of Justice Yashwant Varma of Delhi High court on September 12 passed the stay order following objections raised by Shibu Soren through a Criminal Writ Petition.
Notably, Nishikant Dubey in the review petition has accused Shibu Soren of misleading the court and said that he suppressed facts to secure reliefs. The day when the Delhi HC passed the order, Dubey and Lokpal remained unrepresented before the court.
Dubey had filed a petition before the Lokpal against JMM chief and Rajya Sabha MP Shibu Soren for amassing disproportionate assets in his name as well as family members and others. He demanded a CBI probe into the matter.
He stated that he was not given any advance notice by respondent Shibu Soren ahead of the hearing. He came to know about the court judgment through the media reports. He said that Shibu Soren misled the court by stating that he had given an advance notice to him.
The High Court in its order mentioned that although the Lokpal (first respondent) and Nishikant Dubey (second respondents) are stated to have been placed on advance notice. But none appeared on their behalf when the matter was called.
Shibu Soren challenged the investigation and enquiry of his properties under terms of the provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
The CBI in its preliminary enquiry submitted a list of 82 such properties raised in the name of Shibu Soren, family members and others. Senior Supreme Court advocate Kapil Sibal who represented Shibu Soren said that Section 53 of the Act debar the authority from taking further steps for investigation or enquiry on a complaint which may come to be laid in respect of acts committed seven years prior to the filing of that complaint. It was further pointed out that barring two instances, all other allegations against Shibu Soren fall foul of the injunct placed by Section 53.
On this, Nishikant Dubey has stated that the list of enclosure submitted along with the preliminary report clearly mentions the list of properties acquired by Shibu Soren and his family members. He said that in the said list, two properties which are in the name of Basant Soren are shown to be acquired on 22nd October 2013 and 15th June 2020. Hence, even otherwise, “the said properties fall under the period of 7 years from the date of the complaint, as provided under Section 53 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. Therefore, it is a completely false submission on the part of the petitioner that none of the properties shown in the list falls foul of the injunct placed by Section 53 of the Act,” petition reads.
It further states that four to five properties were clearly acquired within the period contemplated under section 53 of the Lokpal and Lokayukatas Act, 2013 and therefore the injunction placed by section 53 doesn’t apply in this case.
Nishikant Dubey has further pointed out that the inquiry as well as the proceedings initiated against Shibu Soren is at a very nascent stage and therefore, a stay on these proceedings at this stage will lead to final relief to the Petitioner. Nishikant Dubey has further stated that Shibu Soren tried to mislead the court by referring PIL 4290/21 that the matter of similar nature is pending before the court whereas the said proceedings have no bearing whatsoever in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
