Don’t politicise: Court on plea challenging appointment of Maharashtra top cops

The Bombay High Court on Monday declined to urgently hear a plea challenging the Maharashtra government’s notification on the appointment of IPS officer Sanjay Verma as temporary Director General of Police (DGP) this month and Rashmi Shukla as DGP earlier this year.
The petition, filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by lawyer Praful Bhadale, was mentioned for an early hearing by advocates Vineet Naik, Samsher Garud, and Vignesh Iyer.
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar questioned whether the petition qualified as a PIL. The court noted that such petitions must benefit the public and not specific individuals, saying, “A PIL relaxes the locus, but it has to be seen for whom. A PIL is filed for the public in general and not for an aggrieved IPS officer.”
The bench also pointed out the delay in challenging Shukla’s appointment, made in January 2024. “You want to challenge the appointment of Rashmi Shukla, then you should have moved to court in February. Not now. Don’t politicise these issues,” the court said.
The petition argued that Verma’s temporary appointment violates the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) guidelines, as it specifies that the position is “for the period till the completion of the Assembly Election 2024.” It also seeks to nullify the extension granted to Shukla in February 2024.
According to the plea, the state government disregarded the ECI’s directives by favouring Shukla and manipulating the terms of Verma’s appointment. After political parties raised concerns, the ECI reportedly directed Shukla’s removal as DGP. Following this, she went on leave, and Verma was appointed as Temporary DGP.
The bench stated it would hear the matter in due course.