Will finish bribery probe against Sameer Wankhede in 3 months: CBI to HC

On Tuesday, the division bench of justices Ravindra Gughe and MM Sathaye expressed displeasure over the prolonged delay in investigation and questioned the CBI sternly

MUMBAI: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Tuesday told the Bombay high court that it will complete its probe into the bribery case against Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer Sameer Wankhede within three months. The IRS officer had approached the court in May 2023, seeking directions to quash the first information report (FIR) registered against him by the CBI following allegations of bribery in the Cordelia drugs bust case.

On October 3, 2021, the NCB seized drugs on board the Cordelia cruise ship off Mumbai coast and arrested several persons including Shah Rukh’s son Aryan Khan who were present on the ship (Shutterstock)

On October 3, 2021, when Wankhede was zonal director with the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), the agency seized drugs on board the Cordelia cruise ship off the Mumbai coast and arrested several persons including Shah Rukh’s son Aryan Khan who were present on the ship. But Aryan Khan was granted bail by the high court three weeks later as the NCB failed to substantiate the charges against him.

Allegations about Wankhede trying to extort ₹25 crore from Shah Rukh Khan for not implicating his son in the drugs bust case surfaced around this time. The NCB set up a special enquiry team (SET) to probe the allegations and its report formed the basis of the FIR registered by the CBI against Wankhede on May 11, 2022. The IRS officer was booked for criminal conspiracy, extortion, and bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On May 19, 2023, the Delhi high court granted interim protection to Wankhede from any coercive action by the CBI. The IRS officer moved the Bombay high court in the same month, seeking directions to quash the FIR. He claimed in his petition that the sanction obtained from the NCB to proceed against him under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was not proper as the agency did not have authority to grant such sanction. He also claimed that he was not charged with having disproportionate assets in the case, which was essential under section 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On Tuesday, the division bench of justices Ravindra Gughe and MM Sathaye expressed displeasure over the prolonged delay in investigation and questioned the CBI sternly.

“In how many years do you plan to finish the investigation – 10 years, 20 years?” the judges asked.

Senior advocate Aabad Ponda, representing Wankhede, objected to the repeated delays, saying the case, stalled for nearly two years, was affecting his client’s career.

“His promotion remains on hold. If the court admits the petition, we can approach the Central Administrative Tribunal for relief,” Ponda submitted.

When the CBI’s counsel, advocate Kuldeep Patil, requested time to seek instructions, the court noted that this had become a habitual excuse and demanded a definitive timeline. Patil then informed the court that the investigation would be completed within three months.

Following the CBI’s assurance, the court admitted Wankhede’s petition and extended the interim protection earlier granted to him, shielding him from any coercive action. The court also permitted the CBI to file a chargesheet against him during the pendency of his petition, but only after the court’s prior permission.