Prem Chand, who was convicted in 2005 in the corruption case lodged in 1998, had moved the court claiming that the May 21 notification, taking away power of Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) of Delhi government to prosecute policemen, has retrospective effect.
Justice Siddharth Mridul, however, rejected the plea on two grounds - one, that he cannot re-agitate an issue which he had contested all the way to the Supreme Court unsuccessfully and two, things done "before supersession" of the 1998 notification by the latest one "cannot be disturbed or reopened".
Chand was prosecuted on the basis of the 1998 notification of the Centre according to which the Delhi government or LG could proceed against police personnel.
The court noted that May 21 notification stipulates that "things done before the supersession of the earlier (1998) notification cannot be disturbed or reopened".
It further said, "The present petition appears to be an attempt to over reach the judicial process and is resultantly an abuse thereof. The notification relied upon by the petitioner itself entirely stipulates that things done before the supersession of the earlier notification cannot be disturbed or reopened."
The court made the observation while dismissing Chand's plea, who has sought quashing of all the criminal proceedings emanating from an FIR lodged by ACB including his sentence and conviction by the trial court in corruption case.