New Delhi: A Delhi Court today directed CBI to reply on the allegations that Congress leader Jagdish Tytler tried to influence a witness in a 1984 anti Sikh riots case in which the agency has filed a closure report.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S P S Laler sought CBI's response on the statement recorded by the agency of jailed businessman Abhishek Verma during its further investigation in the riots case.
The court, which was hearing arguments on CBI's closure report filed in the case against Tytler, has now fixed the matter for June 26.
During the hearing, senior advocate H S Phoolka, representing the riots victims, apprised the court that Verma in his statement had told CBI that Tytler had allegedly struck a deal with Surinder Kumar Granthi, who was a prime witness in the case and had deposed against the Congress leader about his involvement in the case.
”As per the deal, hefty amount was paid to Surinder (who has died) besides settling his son Narinder Singh abroad. He (Tytler) also told me (Verma) that he had mounted pressure on Narinder who in turn was to pressurize his father Surinder to change his statement in favour of Jagdish Tytler,” Verma had told CBI.
Verma had alleged in his statement that in 2010, Tytler had sent Rs five crore to his sister who lives in Canada and the money was sent through hawala and when the amount reached the account of a trust, it was frozen by the concerned bank.
CBI has also recorded statement of Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan in the case.
On the agency's clean chit to Tytler, Phoolka said that he will file a protest petition against the closure report.
On April 22, the court had fixed today for hearing the closure report filed for the third time by the CBI in the case against Tytler.
The court had earlier said “perusal of records revealed that the cancellation report was also filed earlier as regards accused Jagdish Tytler”.
The court had also issued notice to complainant and victim Lakhvinder, whose husband Badal Singh was killed during the riots, on the closure report.
CBI had said it has conducted further probe in the case, as directed by a sessions court, and filed a closure report in the matter.
In April 2013, CBI was directed by a sessions court to further investigate the case as it set aside its earlier closure report.