AAP moves HC against Meena for allegedly violating court order

The AAP government’s move came almost a month after the High Court declined the city government’s plea to restrain joint commissioner of police Meena from working as the <g data-gr-id="27">Anti Corruption</g> Bureau (ACB) chief.

On the same evening, Meena created a stir by issuing an order <g data-gr-id="31">shunting</g> out inspector Vinay Malik as SHO ACB, appointed by the city government, and posting inspector Brij Mohan in his place.

The Delhi government petition is likely to be heard by the High Court on Wednesday. The Delhi government in its contempt plea said it was constrained to file the contempt petition as Meena had “willfully violated” the court’s June 29, 2015, order, which had asked Lieutenant Governor-appointee ACB chief to act in “accordance with the law”. 

The AAP government also sought contempt proceedings against Mohan, saying he was acting under “direct instruction and orders of Meena”.

“Summon the respondents (Meena and Mohan) and punish them for having committed contempt of court under the provision of the Contempt of Court Act,” the contempt petition filed by Delhi government’s standing counsel Raman Duggal said. The plea said Meena “ensured” that no FIR was registered on the complaints forwarded to the ACB between June 8 and 17.

It also accused him of addressing the media “without having the authority to do so”.

The petition said Meena had purportedly scrapped the anti-corruption helpline number established with the approval of Council of Ministers of the Delhi government and “posted <g data-gr-id="32">personnels</g> in the ACB despite not having authority to do so.”

It further alleged that the ACB chief had “prevented the receipt of the complaint sought to be submitted by SDM and the registration of an FIR thereupon, by orchestrating the removal of the FIR book and the ‘Roznamcha’ from the precincts of the ACB which is a police station under...CrPC and is wholly illegal Act”.

“Therefore, Meena is guilty of acting in brazen disregard and violation of the direction passed by this court. It is submitted that both the respondents have acted in willful and deliberate defiance and disregard of the of the judgment of the Supreme Court...and the order passed by this court on June 29, 2015, whereby Meena was required to function in accordance with law,” the petition said.