CBI questions timing of CD, says wrong to say 2G trial hit
- Indonesian military plane crash death toll rises to 74
- Eurogroup turned down Greek bailout extension, says Finnish FinMin Alexander Stubb
- Disappointment creeping in over Modi govt's reform pace: Moody's
- Dholpur Palace: Congress' fresh document says it's a govt property
- Greece will not pay IMF debt on Tuesday: Finance minister
A day after a CD containing alleged conversation between the CBI's public prosecutor in the 2G scam, A K Singh, and Unitech MD Sanjay Chandra surfaced, the agency questioned the "timing" of the leak, hinting at "corporate espionage".
The CBI has set up a team to look into any setback to the 2G trial because of the episode, following allegations that Singh could have tried to help Chandra. The CD was aired by news channel CNN-IBN.
"We have registered a preliminary inquiry and cannot rule out corporate espionage. The conversation appears to have been recorded in September-October last year. The fact that it was aired just before the JPC meeting and coming Parliament session cannot be ignored," a top CBI official said.
The agency also defended its prosecutor, saying there was no forensic evidence yet to condemn him. "It is wrong to say that the investigations and trial in 2G case have been compromised. Singh has been associated with several important CBI cases in the past and we have to wait for forensic evidence before taking any action against him. He is not the chief public prosecutor in 2G. He is one of the assisting public prosecutors to U U Lalit, who has been appointed by the court as the special public prosecutor," said an officer.
The agency will be sending the voice samples of Singh and Chandra for forensic examination. Under the CrPC, a person's consent is required before taking samples of his voice.
"We have to wait till the CD's genuineness is proved. Once we find prima facie evidence, we will move to the court to seek permission for voice samples," the officer said.
He also added that the CBI cannot comment on the authenticity of the tape. "It is not clear whether someone has illegally taped the phone or recorded the conversation with a sophisticated device."