<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stay the order dismissing Gujarat IPS Officer Satish Chandra Verma, who had assisted the CBI in its probe into the alleged fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan in Gujarat.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices K M Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy declined to interfere with the Delhi High Court’s order, which also had refused to stay the dismissal order. </p>.<p>Verma’s counsel said his client has put in 38 years of service. He asked the court to extend the stay and let the High Court decide the matter.</p>.<p>On this, Justice Joseph said the court needs to balance everything.</p>.<p>“You talked about your honour, prestige. But if the truth is on your side, you will have your day in the court. If justice is on your side, you will succeed," the bench told Verma’s counsel, who replied, “Let me retire with honour".</p>.<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted that he does not object to the advancement of the date.</p>.<p>While refusing to stay the HC's order, the top court said the matter should be considered on November 22, and the matter should be decided as early as possible. The top court clarified that it has not expressed anything on the merits of the case.</p>.<p>Verma was dismissed from service on August 30, ahead of his superannuation on September 30.</p>.<p>The charges against him include interacting "with public media" when he was chief vigilance officer of the North Eastern Electric Power Corporation, Shillong.</p>.<p>He had probed the 2004 Ishrat Jahan case between April 2010 and October 2011 and on his investigation report, a special investigation team held it was a fake encounter. </p>.<p>On Verma's plea, the HC had asked the Centre to file a reply within eight weeks and rejoinder within four weeks thereafter, and fixed the hearing on January 24 next year.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stay the order dismissing Gujarat IPS Officer Satish Chandra Verma, who had assisted the CBI in its probe into the alleged fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan in Gujarat.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices K M Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy declined to interfere with the Delhi High Court’s order, which also had refused to stay the dismissal order. </p>.<p>Verma’s counsel said his client has put in 38 years of service. He asked the court to extend the stay and let the High Court decide the matter.</p>.<p>On this, Justice Joseph said the court needs to balance everything.</p>.<p>“You talked about your honour, prestige. But if the truth is on your side, you will have your day in the court. If justice is on your side, you will succeed," the bench told Verma’s counsel, who replied, “Let me retire with honour".</p>.<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted that he does not object to the advancement of the date.</p>.<p>While refusing to stay the HC's order, the top court said the matter should be considered on November 22, and the matter should be decided as early as possible. The top court clarified that it has not expressed anything on the merits of the case.</p>.<p>Verma was dismissed from service on August 30, ahead of his superannuation on September 30.</p>.<p>The charges against him include interacting "with public media" when he was chief vigilance officer of the North Eastern Electric Power Corporation, Shillong.</p>.<p>He had probed the 2004 Ishrat Jahan case between April 2010 and October 2011 and on his investigation report, a special investigation team held it was a fake encounter. </p>.<p>On Verma's plea, the HC had asked the Centre to file a reply within eight weeks and rejoinder within four weeks thereafter, and fixed the hearing on January 24 next year.</p>
