Former Police Superintendent, Ranchi, has written a supervisory note questioning the investigation into alleged interference in the 2016 Rajya Sabha elections in Jharkhand.
The note was sent by Anshuman Kumar, the former Ranchi SP (City). The following year, he was sent on deputation to the Central Office.
Raja Mitra, the deputy superintendent of police in Hatia, is investigating the case.
In this case, two IPS officers, Anurag Gupta and Ajay Kumar served as advisors to Raghubar Das, the then-chief minister and senior BJP leader.
In the June 2016 elections, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi and Mahesh Poddar of theboth seats.
As of that time, opposition parties had alleged that Gupta and Kumar had “interfered” with the two MLAs’ right to exercise their electoral rights. One MLA was suspected of being prevented from voting due to an arrest warrant issued under Gupta’s influence. In addition to the complaints, a CD containing audio and video recordings of the accusations was submitted.
Later, the EC recommended that a case be registered.
As Kumar noted in his report, although the IO described the Gandhinagar FSL’s report on the CD, he did not reproduce specificnot make transcripts following his instructions. The IO noted that FSL Gandhinagar had sent a deleted DVD (from the phone used to record the audio), which he had not examined… The IO appears to have completed the investigation only based on a few points.”
Even though the IO did not examine the deleted data, the daily diary investigation concluded that the mobile phone was unrelated to the investigation and that “the allegations could not be verified”. The IO should have conducted an investigation and analysis of the recordings; transcripts should have been prepared, and the investigation should have continued.
the IO did not follow this procedure and completed the investigation, indicating that he was not interested in conducting the investigation in the right direction. It is directed to the IO that all videos and audios should be investigated and studied and that they should be entered into a daily diary.
The note also stated that the DVD should be compared with the DVD made available under the court’s instruction; transcripts should be prepared, and the voices should be compared.