CBI wars: Acted against Asthana to maintain integrity of agency says Verma
New Delhi, Nov 10: CBI director in exile, Alok Verma who deposed before the Central Vigilance Commission, justified the action taken against special director, Rakesh Asthana in a bribery case.
Verma said that he acted against Asthana to maintain the integrity of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The CVC is probing allegations against Verma following a Supreme Court directive. The CVC was on October 26 directed to probe the allegations and submit a report in two weeks time.
Also Read | CBI vs CBI: Verma deposes before CVC
Following a written reply given by Verma, the CVC directed him to appear before it on Friday. During the deposition, Verma made a point-by-point rebuttal of the allegations levelled against him by Asthana, who was also sent on leave following a public spat with the director.
During the course of the inquiry, the CVC sent a detailed questionnaire to Verma seeking his responses to the allegations. Verma in his reply denied the allegations and also explained why the FIR registered against CBI special director, Rakesh Asthana was not uploaded on the website.
He said that the CBI took time to upload the copy as the search operations were being conducted on the basis of the FIR and a report of the same was to be given to the court. He however said that the mandatory provision of sending a copy of the FIR to the court was done within 24 hours.
On being asked why Satish Babu Sana, the alleged bribe giver was not booked, Verma, while referring to the amended provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act said that it gives protection to someone who is forced to give bribe, but reports the matter within seven days.
He said that though Babu had started paying bribe in December last year as per his complaint, giving bribe became an offence only this July under the amended PC act. After the amendment, he had paid another bribe through Hawala, but the matter was reported within seven days, Verma contended. He said that this is the reason why he was not treated as an accused despite paying bribes since December 2017.