Mumbai: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has opposed the plea by the wife of suspended arrested Directorate of Enforcement (ED) officer Sandeep Singh contending that the grounds of his arrest were communicated to the arrested officer and also to his wife and immediate supervisory officer Naveen Rana. Therefore, there has been “no violation of any law / rule” in Singh’s arrest.
The CBI filed an affidavit in response to Singh’s wife, Divya Singh, seeking immediate release of her husband claiming that his arrest and detention were illegal. Her advocate Sujay Kantawalla contended that Singh was not provided grounds of his arrest as mandated by the law.
On August 7, Singh was arrested from Delhi based on a complaint filed by Mumbai based jeweller Vipul Thakker. The businessman alleged that Singh, an assistant director with ED, demanded Rs20 lakh for not arresting his son and then he started harassing the family. Singh was then brought to mumbai the next day on transit remand.
Singh, being a senior Public Servant, had committed the offence “clandestinely and his arrest was necessary for the purpose of proper investigation of the case, to prevent him from tampering with the evidence and from winning over the witnesses considering his official position…”, the CBI added.
Opposing the plea, the probe agency, has claimed that the case is at the crucial stage and various incriminating evidences are coming forth, “The accused is highly placed, moneyed and influential person. Enlarging him on bail at this stage will be detrimental to the interest of investigation and further recovery of material evidence facts,” the CBI reply contended.
Singh was arrested red-handed while taking bribe and hence no notice was served to him. “The entire spectrum of his role appears to be too deep and needs thorough investigation,” the plea read. It added: “This is a case of corruption at high places and intricate financial transactions/records, the investigation of which is likely to be completed within the stipulated time of 60 days since arrest of the accused.”
Terming the petition as “frivilous, malafied and devoid of any merit”, CBI’s affdivt contends that the petitioner has suppressed facts. The investigating agency has emphasised that the arrest memo was furnihsed to Singh, which contained the grounds of arrest. Singh had acknowledged receipt of the memo by signing on the same.
Also, as per the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Snahita (BNSS), audio video recording of search and seizure of residence was done by CBI and the same is submitted before special judge. The matter is kept for hearing on September 3.
