Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
The arguments on charge in the matter were heard in detail on 27.05.2011 and the matter was kept for order today. The case FIR in the present matter was registered on 22.11.2002, on the basis of a complaint dated 05.11.2002, received by CBI from Shri Rajinder Singh, Dy. Inspector General of Police (Pers.), Central Reserve Police Force (in short "CRPF"), wherein it was alleged that ExConstable Satyender Tiwari (hereinafter referred to as "accused"), who stood dismissed from service from CRPF on 28.03.2000, after departmental enquiry, was engaged in sending representations for his reinstatement through various political persons, particularly Shri Brij Mohan Ram, Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha). It was further stated that a letter dated 11.12.2001, addressed to Shri Shahid Ahmed, Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector (CRPF), Patna and letter dated 20.02.2002, addressed to DG, CRPF, purported to have been written by Shri L.K Advani, the then RC11(S)/02: CBI/SCRIII/ND: U/s 120 B IPC r/w 467/468/471 IPC DOD: 06.06.2011 Home Minister of India, regarding reinstatement of accused in service were received through fax. Enquiries revealed that the said letters were never sent from the O/o Home Minister of India. Subsequently, copy of letter dated 11.01.2002, allegedly written by Shri PPS Sidhu, IG (Pers.), CRPF addressed to IG, Bihar Sector, CRPF, Patna regarding reinstatement of accused in service with instructions for his posting at IG, CRPF, Muzzafarpur was received in the office of DG, CRPF, Delhi, which were duly forwarded by Shri Brij Mohan, MP (Lok Sabha), vide his letters dated 30.04.2002 and 18.07.2002. On enquiry from Shri PPS Sidhu, IG (Pers.), CRPF, it was found that letter purportedly written by him was forged one and he had never sent the same. On the basis of aforesaid letter of Shri Rajinder Singh, Dy. Inspector General of Police (Pers.), case FIR in the matter U/s 120 B IPC r/w Sections 467/468/471 and 420/511 IPC was registered.
The investigation conducted in the matter disclosed that aggrieved by his dismissal from service, accused indulged in fabricating and forging the letters in the name of Shri L.K Advani, the then Home Minister and Shri PPS Sidhu, IG (Pers.), CRPF and sent the same through fax with the letter of Shri Brij Mohan Ram, MP (LS) to Director General of Police (CRPF) and IG (CRPF) in order to pressurise the aforesaid senior officers of CRPF for reinstating him in service.
RC11(S)/02: CBI/SCRIII/ND: U/s 120 B IPC r/w 467/468/471 IPC DOD: 06.06.2011 Investigation further disclosed that letter dated 11.12.2001, addressed to Shri Shahid Ahmed, IGP, CRPF, Bihar Sector, purportedly sent by Shri L.K Advani, the then Home Minister was received in the office of IGP through fax installed in his office and the same was sent through fax number 3363817. The said fax number through which the aforesaid letter was sent to IGP was lying installed in the office of Shri Chandeshwari Prasad Singh, Junior Intelligence Officer, Intelligence Bureau, MHA, Govt. of India, but the same was not having STD and fax facility. Shri Chandeshwari Prasad Singh denied his acquaintance with the accused and denied having ever sent any fax message from his aforesaid telephone number.
Thereafter, the chargesheet in the matter was filed on 07.01.2008 against the accused and his brother was absolved from the case. RC11(S)/02: CBI/SCRIII/ND: U/s 120 B IPC r/w 467/468/471 IPC DOD: 06.06.2011 The learned Special PP for CBI, Shri Anil Tanwar has very vehemently argued that accused is the sole beneficiary of all the three letters, namely (i) D7 dated 11.12.2001, purportedly written to Shri Shahid Ahmed, IGP by Shri L.K Advani, the then Home Minister, (ii) letter D10, dated 20.02.2002, purportedly written to Shri Trinath Mishra, DG, CRPF by Shri L.K Advani, the then Home Minister of India and (iii) letter dated 11.01.2002, purportedly written by Shri Shahid Ahmed, IGP, CRPF by Shri PPS Sidhu, DG (Pers. & HQ) and as such, there is presumption that he had got faxed the aforesaid letters to the higher officers of CRPF for pressurising them to reinstate him in service. The aforesaid argument is further being strengthened with supplementary argument that during the departmental enquiry proceedings, one of the charges against the accused was of impersonating political persons.