Former NCB Mumbai zonal director Sameer Wankhede’s conduct raise a number of questions
Indian Revenue Service officer and former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) Mumbai zonal director Sameer Wankhede’s troubles are unlikely to end soon.A couple of days after he made public the purported chats with film star Shah Rukh Khan during Aryan Khan’s arrest, it has emerged that he might have broken rules. The drugs-on-cruise case against Aryan proved to be a false one, but it brought Wankhede in the limelight—and now a lot of problems for him. An inquiry carried out by the NCB’s Special Enquiry Team (SET) on Wankhede resulted in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registering a case against him and others for trying to extort Rs 25 crore Shah Rukh Khan for the release of Aryan. The CBI has accused Wankhede of not just extortion but also of living a lavish lifestyle, much beyond the salary of a government servant, even beyond his and his wife’s combined annual income of Rs 4,561,460. During 2017-21, he reportedly made six family trips abroad. They visited the UK, Ireland, Portugal, South Africa and Maldives, staying for 55 days. His claim is that just Rs 8.75 lakh was spent, but this amount hardly covers air travel. The CBI has mentioned a number of expensive watches (Rolex) and properties, which no middle class person can afford to own—certainly not four flats in Mumbai and about 417-acre land in Washim. He cannot even claim that he inherited property, because his father was also a government servant, not a business tycoon.
Wankhede’s conduct and luxurious lifestyle raise a number of questions. First, why did no one in the system bother to find out about his opulence? After all, foreign visits with family involve huge expenses. Why didn’t anyone know about the ownership of his properties? Had it not been the Aryan Khan case, and his alleged misdemeanour in it, he might have continued living life king size. Are there other officers as well who have wealth and income disproportionate to their known sources of income? Has any Government, at the Centre or in States, learnt a lesson from this episode and tried to find out about such officers? If any such attempt is being made, it is not in the public domain. Then there is also the issue of human rights and civil liberties. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is a harsh law, which is not wrong, for drugs are a menace to the society, especially youngsters; the offenders ought to be dealt with in a harsh manner. But it should not become an instrument in the hands of unscrupulous officers. The SET report and the CBI’s accusation against Wankhede suggest that the harshness of the law was aimed at Aryan who was proved to be innocent. Apparently, there are not enough safeguards to shield innocents from the machinations of the dodgy officers. It is time the powers that be ensured that the war on drugs is waged against criminals, not innocent people.
