What is the Jharkhand HC's stance on Anurag Gupta's DGP appointment?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Jharkhand High Court has given state and central authorities a final chance to respond to a contempt petition regarding Anurag Gupta's DGP appointment. BJP leader Babulal Marandi claims the appointment violates Supreme Court guidelines. This case raises significant questions surrounding procedural integrity and governance in Jharkhand.
Key Takeaways
- The Jharkhand High Court is demanding responses regarding Anurag Gupta's DGP appointment.
- BJP leader Babulal Marandi's petition raises serious allegations about procedural violations.
- The case emphasizes the need for transparent governance in police appointments.
- The Supreme Court's guidelines must be adhered to in DGP selections.
- Judicial oversight plays a crucial role in maintaining accountability in state governance.
Ranchi, June 16 (NationPress) The Jharkhand High Court has provided yet another chance for the state and central governments, along with the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), to respond to a contempt petition initiated by BJP leader Babulal Marandi. This petition challenges the appointment of Anurag Gupta as the Director General of Police (DGP) for Jharkhand.
The division bench led by Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao previously heard this issue on March 24 and instructed all parties involved to submit their replies by June 16. However, during the hearing on Monday, the court chose to allow one more chance for compliance.
Marandi, who also serves as the Leader of Opposition in the Jharkhand Assembly, contends that the appointment of Anurag Gupta breaches both the Supreme Court's directives and the guidelines set by the UPSC concerning the selection process for the DGP role.
He argues that the state government dismissed former DGP Ajay Kumar Singh prior to the end of his two-year term without any significant allegations, which contradicts the guidelines established by the apex court.
This contempt petition lists numerous high-ranking officials as respondents, including Chief Secretary Alka Tiwari, Home Secretary Vandana Dadel, DGP Anurag Gupta, Chairman of the DGP Selection Committee Justice (Retd) Ratnakar Bhengra, and former DGP Neeraj Sinha, who was also part of the selection committee.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Prakash Singh vs Union of India case, the petition asserts that the UPSC is responsible for shortlisting three qualified IPS officers with clean service records and adequate residual service from a list provided by the state.
It is the state's duty to appoint one of these officers for a minimum term of two years. Ajay Kumar Singh was appointed as DGP on February 14, 2023, and was expected to serve until February 2025, but was removed prematurely, according to the petition.
Additionally, Marandi has claimed that there were procedural irregularities in the establishment of the selection committee that endorsed Anurag Gupta’s name.
As per state regulations, the selection panel should consist of representatives from both the UPSC and the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC). Yet, the petition highlights that neither organization had a representative present during the critical meeting.
The High Court is now demanding detailed responses from all parties involved for the upcoming hearing.
Point of View
The ongoing legal proceedings reflect the importance of upholding judicial principles and procedural fairness in government appointments. The allegations surrounding Anurag Gupta's appointment as DGP highlight the necessity for transparency and adherence to established guidelines, reinforcing the foundational tenets of democracy and justice.
NationPress
16/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What prompted the contempt petition against Anurag Gupta's appointment?
The contempt petition, filed by BJP leader Babulal Marandi, alleges that Anurag Gupta's appointment as DGP violated Supreme Court guidelines and UPSC directives regarding the selection process.
Who are the key officials involved in the contempt petition?
The petition names several officials including Chief Secretary Alka Tiwari, Home Secretary Vandana Dadel, DGP Anurag Gupta, and Justice (Retd) Ratnakar Bhengra, among others.
What is the Supreme Court's role in DGP appointments?
The Supreme Court mandates that the UPSC shortlist three eligible IPS officers for the DGP position, ensuring a transparent selection process.
What are the implications of the High Court's decision?
The High Court's decision to seek responses from the state and central governments signifies a commitment to uphold legal standards and accountability in police appointments.
How does this case reflect on governance in Jharkhand?
This case highlights critical issues regarding governance, procedural integrity, and the rule of law within the state, raising concerns among the public and political circles.
