No coincidence that Meena became ACB chief after Jung’s involvement in CNG scam: Vishwas


In a fresh new twist to the ACB Delhi row, the Delhi government has now moved the High Court against the appointment of MK Meena as the chief of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). The AAP led Delhi government wants removal of Meena till the main petition of the party challenging the Centre’s notification of May 21 is decided by the Court.

Kumar Vishwas alleged that the ACB had not been able to register a single FIR since MK Meena was appointed as the new ACB chief.

He said, ” this can’t be coincidence that days after there are reports of LG’s involvement in CNG scam, his office appointed his own man as the ACB chief, This is a joke and people of Delhi who voted an anti-corruption party like ours will give them a fitting reply.”

AAP’s Delhi head, Dilip Pandey, told reporters that the central government was hell bent on promoting corrupt practices. He said that Meena’s insistence on getting control of the FIR book was at the behest of the Lt Governor.

He alleged that Meena’s appointment was made with a motive by the LG’s office.

“People of this country can tolerate anything but not the appointment of a corrupt person like MK Meena as the ACB head.”

On June 9, Delhi Lt. Governor Najeeb Jung had appointed Meena to head the anti-graft unit, displacing SS Yadav, an officer handpicked by chief minister Arvind Kejriwal himself.

The AAP government had attempted to stall Meena’s appointment, alleging that it was illegal as there was no position in the ACB for him to fill. The Vigilance Department of the Delhi government, which oversees functioning of the ACB, had issued a letter asking him to go back to his Delhi Police task.

On the other hand, Meena had refused to comply with the Vigilance Department’s direction and had written back saying he had already assumed charge of the ACB and even vowed legal action if his functioning was hampered.

The Delhi High Court had last month termed the notification ‘suspect’ in which the Centre had stated that the Lieutenant Governor is the final authority on appointments of senior officials. The Court had noted that the Lieutenant Governor, who represents the Centre, is “bound to act upon the aid and advice” of the Delhi council of Ministers.

The ‘suspect’ tag was challenged by the Centre in the Supreme Court, which had said that the High Court must hear the case independently and not get influenced by any outside observations.