Bhushans: Court once more rejects police plea to shut case, says probe extra

For the second time in 9 years, a Delhi courtroom has rejected a Delhi Police request to shut a 2011 case concerning an audio CD and directed it to analyze the CD contents once more.
The case pertains to a purported cellphone dialog between former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan, SP chief Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar Singh (who handed away final 12 months) through which a voice, allegedly that of Bhushan, refers to his lawyer-son Prashant Bhushan who can “manage… very well” and to a then Supreme Court decide.
The re-investigation path got here on January 28 this 12 months. In its April 2014 “untrace report”, the Special Cell of Delhi Police had mentioned although Shanti Bhushan “suspected that “Amar Singh “could be behind the fabrication and circulation of the audio CD to malign his reputation” and that its circulation among the many media “was intended as an attempt to force him to leave the joint drafting committee for the Jan Lokpal Bill, since Mr Kapil Sibal and Sh P Chidambaram, the Union Ministers, were against his participation as co-chairman of the drafting committee… he could not put forward any worthwhile evidence in support of his allegations against… Chidambaram… Sibal and… Singh except oral allegations”.
“It is not correct to proceed against anyone only on the basis of presumptions and without any substantial and corroborative evidence. Hence this case is being filed as untraced for want of any sufficient evidence,” police mentioned in its report.
Police additionally cited a CFSL Delhi report which mentioned that contents of the CD had not been copied from the Amar Singh tapes that did the rounds following alleged tapping of his cellphone in 2005-06 – thereby rejecting a declare made by Prashant Bhushan.

After going by the report, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pankaj Sharma mentioned it seems that “the investigation has not been carried out in terms” of the courtroom’s earlier “order dated 25.01.2012 wherein police was directed to investigate the matter on nine points”.
The CMM “further directed” the probe officer “to investigate the contents of the CD in question and file a report”. Although Shanti Bhushan’s counsel didn’t oppose the police request to simply accept the “untrace report” since Amar Singh was already lifeless, the courtroom handed its order.
The case was registered on April 15, 2011 following a criticism by Shanti Bhushan that the CD appeared to have been “fabricated to malign me” and that its contents have been “defamatory”.
The contents of the audio CD was first reported by The Indian Express – it was obtained on the workplace of The Indian Express on April 13, 2011, in an unsigned envelope, with out handle of the sender, and the newspaper subsequently despatched it to the Chief Justice of India.
The Bhushans, who have been at the moment non-government representatives in a panel constituted to draft the Lokpal Bill following a quick by social activist Anna Hazare, denied that the cellphone dialog ever came about and referred to as it a “conspiracy” to weaken the Anna motion.
Prashant Bhushan additionally instructed that it might have been a part of makes an attempt to intrude within the judicial course of in two instances through which he was the petitioner.
On July 27, 2011, the Special Cell had filed a cancellation report with the CMM Tis Hazari stating that although the “CD in question is not doctored/tampered with” however the “allegations… that the CD has been fabricated in order to malign him (Shanti Bhushan) could not be substantiated and hence the offence of forgery u/s 469 IPC was not made out”.
The investigators relied on a report of the CFSL, Delhi and Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) in addition to assertion of Amar Singh to reach at this conclusion.
In his assertion in July 2011, Singh informed police that “few years back, Shanti Bhushan had visited him from Hotel Taj Man Singh. Sh. Virendra Bhatia, the then Advocate General of UP Government, was also present with him. During discussion regarding some case of Sh. Mulayam Singh Yadav pending in the Allahabad High Court, (may be case of defection against Sh. Mulayam Singh Yadav), Sh. Shanti Bhushan wanted to talk to Sh. Mulayam Singh Yadav. He (Amar Singh) called Sh. Mulayam Singh Yadav from the land line number of his residence and left the room after handing over the receiver of the phone to Sh. Shanti Bhushan, hence he did not listen the conversation between them”.
Police mentioned Singh additionally “confirmed part of the conversation taken place between him and Sh. Mulayam Singh Yadav”.
Two protest petitions, opposing the cancellation plea, have been filed – one by Shanti Bhushan and one other by two attorneys. Shanti Bhushan mentioned opinions given by an professional within the US and one other by Hyderabad-based Truth Labs had “clearly found the conversation in CD to be ‘doctored’.” In the Truth Labs examination, some sentences, he mentioned, “were found verbatim copied from” the Amar Singh tapes and that “the copies thereof (of these two reports) were supplied to the investigating agency, but the said opinions were withheld in the final (cancellation) report”.
After listening to the protest petitions, the courtroom, on January 25, 2012, refused to simply accept the cancellation report and despatched the case again for additional probe on 9 grounds together with the supply of the CD, who ready and circulated it, date and time of its preparation, motive behind its creation.
Police obtained voice samples of Singh, Yadav and Shanti Bhushan and despatched them to CFSL Delhi which “opined that voices contained in the CD in question were the probable voices of” the trio.
Virendra Bhatia couldn’t be examined as a result of he had handed away in 2010.

When The Sunday Express sought his feedback on the courtroom order for additional probe, Shanti Bhushan blamed Amar Singh and mentioned “the police were not interested in properly investigating… The CD came when Anna nominated me and Prashant (Bhushan) to the drafting committee.”
“They should have properly investigated because it was quite clear that this was a fabricated CD. Therefore, who were the parties in the conspiracy for the fabrication of the CD was to be found out by the police…They wanted to destroy my reputation by manufacturing a false CD,” he mentioned, including that the “court should transfer the investigation to CBI”.
Prashant Bhushan mentioned: “The Truth Labs had examined the two tapes and had come to the conclusion that Mulayam Singh’s voice had been lifted from the Amar Singh tapes. Clearly, this particular tape, this CD was fabricated. Because Amar Singh’s voice is also there in it, therefore Amar Singh had to be complicit in fabricating it. Police did not do a proper job. That is why they are again and again being asked to reinvestigate.”