The Bombay High Court expressed dissatisfaction with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for evading a clear response regarding the potential arrest of India Revenue Service (IRS) officer Sameer Wankhede in a bribery case. Wankhede stands accused of allegedly demanding bribes from Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan.

During a hearing on the CBI's plea to lift the interim protection order granted to Wankhede, the court observed the agency's reluctance to answer questions about his possible arrest. Justices AS Gadkari and SG Dige criticized the CBI, a prime investigating agency, for playing "hide and seek" and failing to state its intentions regarding Wankhede's arrest.

The court pointed out that since the CBI had issued a notice under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the question of arresting Wankhede did not arise. Nevertheless, the court asked the agency to clarify whether it intended to arrest him and suggested a 48-hour notice period if an arrest were planned.

The CBI's counsel, Kuldeep Patil, advised Wankhede to seek anticipatory bail in the sessions court instead of addressing the court's question directly. This response further frustrated the bench, which demanded a clear answer and questioned why the agency was evading the issue.

The court proposed that the CBI issue a notice indicating a 48-hour timeframe before making an arrest, allowing Wankhede to approach the sessions court for anticipatory bail. Patil maintained that he was requesting the court not to restrain the agency from taking appropriate action for the investigation.

Unsatisfied with the CBI's responses, the court requested the case diary of the investigation to assess the progress made and evaluate the facts. Patil stated that he would present the diary on Monday.

The court expressed concern over the agency's reluctance to state whether they intended to arrest Wankhede, questioning the proper maintenance of the case diary. It granted the CBI three days to produce the diary, emphasizing the need for clarity and adherence to proper record-keeping.

The CBI had registered a criminal case against Wankhede for allegedly demanding a bribe of ₹25 crores from Shah Rukh Khan to avoid implicating his son, Aryan Khan, in the Cordelia cruise ship drugs case of 2021. Wankhede faced charges under Sections 7, 7A, and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, along with Sections 120B and 388 of the Indian Penal Code.

After Wankhede sought the quashing of the FIR against him, the High Court granted him interim protection. The CBI maintained that it had obtained the necessary sanction from the Home Ministry to take action against Wankhede under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as he was a public servant. Wankhede challenged the validity of this sanction, alleging it lacked jurisdiction and was legally flawed.