The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed CBI to inform about the status of the four CBI officers sought to be transferred out of the fodder scam cases after the agency was caught red-handed lying to the Court about their role in the pending trial involving RJD leader lalu Prasad Yadav.
The court had ordered stay on the transfers at the instance of JD(U) MP Rajeev Ranjan Singh, alias lallan, who alleged that the transfers were aimed to delay the trial involving high-profile persons. The four officers, all of the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) rank, namely AK Jha, Asheesh Kumar, BK Singh and D Murmoo, were ‘pairvi’ officers in the fodder scam cases for a considerable period. Jha was supervising probe of the case against former Bihar CM lalu Prasad Yadav since 1997 as was the case of BK Singh while Asheesh Kumar and Murmoo supervised probe since May 2000 and November 2011 respectively.
ASG Sidharth luthra said the four officers were ‘pairvi’ officer distinct from an investigating officer (IO) as he had no role in examination of evidence recorded in Court. At best he was a “document supplier” who acted as a link between the prosecutor and the CBI to make available search memo, medical verification, etc, ASG added. CBI handed over a chart to show that all fodder case except that of lalu had concluded paving the way for the transfer orders and added that DSP BK Singh was not an IO in any fodder scam case. But lallan’s counsel senior advocate Ranjeet Kumar read out the agency’s own application in the Jharkhand High Court where it showed the four officers as head investigation officers (HIO). For this reason, the HC asked the officers to be present whenever required during trial even as it allowed their transfer.
Questioning CBI’s double speak, the bench of Justices GS Singhvi and V Gopala Gowda asked, “Is there discrepancy in the chart handed over to us todayIJ” ASG luthra quite understood the bench’s mood and sought time till Monday to take instructions. The Court directed the agency to supply complete information about the “status and posting” of the four officers. The bench’s concern also stemmed from the fact that 17 years had elapsed since the FIR got registered and trial had not completed. Out of 345 witnesses, 70 remained to be examined and out of 53 cases, nine cases involving politicians and bureaucrats were still pending.