Chhikara, a serving motor licensing officer (MLO) at the Burari inspection transport authority, had requested recording of his statement under Section 164 of CrPC, alleging that the investigating officer has not been recording his statement (under section 161 of CrPC before the police) in a way in which "truth will be revealed". A statement made under section 164 of CrPC can be used as evidence in a court of law. Also, retracting from a statement made under this section amounts to perjury.
According to the FIR registered in the case, the government's transport department is accused of giving undue favours to a private company. It is also alleged that the company after winning the contract for giving "fitness certificates" to vehicles at the Burari authority, cheated people by charging them for tests which were never conducted due to unavailability of the equipment.
On July 23, the court allowed Chhikara's application, stating that "the investigating officer being a middle rank officer is under pressure from the seniors and is deliberately avoiding recording of the statement". The judge also took into account Chhikara's claim that he was under constant threat from the main accused persons and was even assaulted at their instance on June 1. "The witness and IO shall appear before the CMM, Tis Hazari courts, on July 24 for compliance of order," reads the first order.
However, the ACB sleuths contested it on July 24, seeking a stay on the application. On July 27, after arguments on the application, the same court recalled its order noting, "This court fails to understand the source of knowledge of the witness that his statement is incompletely or incorrectly recorded."
It further relied on a higher court's judgment placed before it by the ACB saying, a "magistrate is not expected to record statement under section 164 of the code without the investigating officer moving for it and this does not indicate that such statement, if recorded by the magistrate, is either inadmissible in law or cannot be admitted in the evidence."
The court also said that the earlier order was passed on the premise that Anil Chikkara has not yet recorded his statement under section 161 (before police). "The IO on July 24 clarified that two statements of the witness have already been recorded," reads the order.
Chhikara, speaking to TOI, said he had been wanting to record a statement before the court to disclose the names of all senior politicians and bureaucrats who were involved in the scam. The witness, who claims to be under constant threat, has also recorded a CD, giving names of senior bureaucrats and politicians who he claims must be held guilty in case of his death. Chhikara was attacked on June 1 by goons who threatened him for acting as a whistleblower. He reportedly provided documents to the complainant, Vivek Garg, an RTI activist, under the RTI Act.
Meanwhile, BJP MLA Dr Harshvardhan has demanded a CBI inquiry in the case. "How do you expect a fair probe in the case by a body (ACB) that falls under Delhi government, a department of which is the main accused in the case," asked Harshvardhan. He further said that the ACB should have at least picked up threads from the statement of Chhikara and sent notices to the officials and politicians allegedly involved in the case. "Strangely, ACB has been suppressing all the facts," he alleged.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Burari scam: Witness plea granted, later order recalled
Dengan url
http://sehatputihgigiku.blogspot.com/2013/08/burari-scam-witness-plea-granted-later.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Burari scam: Witness plea granted, later order recalled
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Burari scam: Witness plea granted, later order recalled
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar