The case was filed by the CBI over the theft of a temple idol from Allahabad in 1981. (File photo)
A special city court has described the CBI as "Muddai Sust, Gawah Chust
" (the complainant is lazy, but the witness is active) for not being vigilant enough to ensure the disposal of a 37-year-old case, probably the oldest pending matter in the country.
The CBI's decision of transferring a prosecutor from a court without posting another one in advance drew the court's ire which not only rebuked the agency but also imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on its director of prosecution for delaying the criminal case.
The remarks were made by Special Judge Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal, who was hearing a case of theft of an antique idol from the ancient Takashakeshwar Mahadev temple in Allahabad in 1981 which was being allegedly smuggled to New York. The case is at the stage of final arguments.
The court said it was aware that it "cannot put its neck" into the administrative affairs of a department as the sole prerogative of the agency was to man its human resources.
It said the issue was not why a particular senior public prosecutor of this court was transferred when the hearing of this 37-years-old case was in progress.
But the question is "why steps in anticipation were not taken by the director prosecution so that no inconvenience is caused to this court for effective disposal of this oldest case and the other old cases in which the hearing was in progress," the court said.
The judge said as per mandate of the Supreme Court, for effective disposal of more than 10-year-old cases, it had specifically asked previous prosecutor B K Singh to prepare himself, but he was transferred within six months.
He was transferred at a time when he had advanced himself with all the facts and law of the cases pending in this court and no advance information was sent to court regarding his transfer, the judge said.
"As is apparent on the face of the record, this is the best case where an old saying 'Muddai Sust, Gawah Chust' has come true in all its spirit. The case was filed by the CBI and hence it should have been vigilant enough to see that the old cases are disposed off as early as possible," the court observed.
The court also sent its order to the Home Secretary and the Director of CBI to take necessary action in this regard.