The Hindu : Taj case: CBI asked to question more persons

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Aug 22, 2003

National

National

Taj case: CBI asked to question more persons

By J. Venkatesan

NEW DELHI Aug. 21. The Supreme Court today directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to interrogate "four or five mighty persons" in the Mayawati Government in Uttar Pradesh mentioned in the "interim confidential report" and involved in the decision to grant contract for the Rs. 175-crore Taj Heritage Project.

(Observing that "something is wrong somewhere'', the court, on July 16, had ordered a preliminary inquiry by the CBI to pin those responsible for sanctioning the project which encompassed five important monuments — Taj Mahal, Agra Fort, Rambagh, Itmad-ud-Daula and Chini ka Roja).

A Bench comprising Justice M.B. Shah and Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, after perusing the interim report submitted by the CBI, directed a higher officer of the CBI to interrogate four or five or more persons and submit the report to the court on September 11.

The Bench observed that it would be open to the Investigating Officer not only to interrogate but also verify the assets of these four or five persons because it was alleged that Rs. 17 crores was released for the construction of the project without proper sanction.

The Bench made it clear that the CBI must take immediate action without giving further opportunity to the persons named to manoeuvre. "There is this person who is wielding the authority there," the Bench observed when the Additional Solicitor-General, Altaf Ahmed, referred to interpolation of documents.

The Bench asked the Director of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory to engage a handwriting expert immediately and give opinion on interpolation of documents as early as possible.

When the Chairman of the expert committee, Krishan Mahajan, requested the court that some of the "powerful persons'' be placed under suspension, the Bench said it would not be proper to suspend without hearing them.

Earlier appearing for the CBI, Mr. Altaf Ahmed submitted that one of the four or five important persons questioned by the agency in the preliminary stage refused to sign a single paper. He urged the court to give some direction as he was a "powerful person".

The Bench reminded the ASG that the CBI was equally powerful and could question him again. The ASG said the proper course would be to register a First Information Report (FIR) and then investigate them. But the Bench did not accept this.

After perusing the interim report it directed that it be kept in the court Registry in a sealed cover as it would not be proper at this stage to disclose the names of the persons mentioned. The proceedings were adjourned till September 11.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National