Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh on Wednesday expressed disappointment over the ongoing probe into the Madhya Pradesh Professional Board Examination (MPPEB) scam saying he will approach President Pranab Mukherjee on the issue to get justice.
After appearing before the Special Investigating Team (SIT) that is looking into the MPPEB exam scam, Singh told mediapersons, “I am very disappointed with the way STF and the SIT under the supervision of the High Court were probing the scam. I will now approach the President on the issue to get justice and if nothing happens after that also, then will have to take a tough step.”
The Congress leader said he had submitted to both the probe agencies, a report from ‘Truth lab’, India's most credible Bangalore-based forensic laboratory, on the issue of tampering of evidence recovered from the hard disk of MPPEB chief system analyst, Nitin Mahindra's computer.
On the basis an excel-sheet, which Singh claimed was tampered with. The prosecution in the scam is underway. “The mirror image of the excel-sheet recovered from the hard disk at the time of its initial seizure was later found changed when it was opened again around after two hours, as the name of CM mentioned at 48 places was found replaced with that of ‘Uma Bhartiji’, ‘Raj Bhawan’ and ‘Minister’,” he alleged.
Singh claimed that even Truth lab in its report certified the mirror image of the excel sheet initially taken by the whistleblower in the scam. Congress leader accompanied by senior Supreme Court lawyer Vivek Tankha demanded a CBI inquiry into the scam and said that STF will not be able to conduct a fair probe in the matter as Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan in his official capacity writes the confidential report of officials probing the scam.
A delegation of Congress leaders also petitioned MP Governor Ram Naresh Yadav, who along with his deceased son is also an accused in the case, and demanded that he send the petition to the President. Singh asserted that he will not give up until an FIR is registered against Chouhan as he was also a beneficiary in the case.