Further investigation - cbi

CBI No.99/19

CBI vs Closure Report (Fake CBI Report Case)

CNR No.DLCT12-000853-2019

(Anjani Mahajan)

 CMM/RADC/New Delhi

 17.01.2023

 

16. It is also pertinent to note that although it is stated in

the final report that the concerned journalists Sh. Deepak

Chaurasia, Sh. Bhupinder Chaubey and Sh. Manoj Mitta had

been examined, however, the copy of statement of only Sh.

Bhupinder Chaubey u/s 161 Cr.P.C. is on record and it is only Sh.

Bhupinder Chaubey who is mentioned as a witness in the list of

witnesses filed by CBI alongwith the initial final report. I may

note that in the list of witnesses filed alongwith the

supplementary untrace report, the name of Sh. Bhupinder

Chaubey as well as names of certain other witnesses mentioned

in the original list of witnesses have inexplicably been removed

by the CBI which requires a re-look by the CBI. There are no

statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Sh. Deepak Chaurasia and Sh.

Manoj Mitta on the record nor are they cited as witnesses in

either of the lists of the witnesses filed by the CBI. 

17. Further enquiry is required to be conducted from the

concerned journalists on the aspect of their respective sources 

DL­00524

-7-

from whom they received the purported impugned forged

documents which became the basis of their respective news

items. Further, based on such information, additional clues

regarding the identities of the culprits who entered into the

alleged criminal conspiracy, prepared and fraudulently and

knowingly used as genuine the forged document by providing it

to the media/ getting it published/aired, could be found and

probed. Further investigation on this aspect is thus required to be

conducted.

18. Additionally, as per averments in the final report, the

two alleged forged status reports dated 30.07.2007 and

20.08.2007 contained several paragraphs lifted from the undated

status report of the CBI which was kept in sealed cover for the

perusal of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The final report

is totally silent on the aspect of investigation, if at all any

conducted, as to how the official document i.e. the undated status

report of the CBI which was kept in sealed cover got leaked a

day before it was to be filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court, from

the office of CBI, ultimately reaching the media. Further, as per

the opinion of the FSL expert, the signatures of Smt. Tilotama

Varma had been lifted from the original note-sheet and

compressed and reproduced on the alleged 17 pages review note.

The final report does not disclose any investigation done, on the

aspect of how the forger could have gained access to the original

note-sheet of Smt. Tilotama Varma from which the signatures had

been lifted, compressed and reproduced on the alleged forged

document as per opinion of the CFSL. 

DL­00524

-8-

19. Thus, further, investigation is also required to be

carried out by the CBI on the modus operandi adopted by the

culprits for gaining access to/obtaining the official documents

including probing involvement of any insider in the acts alleged

and preparing the alleged forged 17 pages review note.

20. Hence, the untrace report is rejected and the CBI is

directed to carry out further investigation in the present case. 

21. It is made clear that the IO, CBI shall be at liberty to

carry out further investigation or any other aspects as deemed fit,

however, the aspects highlighted in this order should be covered

in the further investigation to be conducted and supplementary

report to be filed.