Recently, ED take action against the false allegations made by Atishi. The ED has stated it may take critical legal action towards Delhi Minister Atishi for the “fake, baseless and malicious allegations” she made towards the enterprise.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has stated it is able to take severe legal action against Delhi Minister Atishi for the “false, baseless and malicious allegations” she made in opposition to the probe corporation.Â
What ED says in a press conferenceÂ
The ED, in a press conference, said, “Allegations leveled against ED concerning the deletion of CCTV footage of sure accused people are completely false and malicious. All statements of the accused individuals were recorded under CCTV surveillance, and the same has been given to the accused persons as sought by using them, and the Ld Trial Court additionally provided the same.Â
CCTV system records photos in video form. No audio recording has ever been deleted with the aid of ED officers. Audio facility was just not to be had in the earlier CCTV system of ED. ED data loads of statements in quasi-judicial lawsuits in an expert way. Baseless allegations are trumped up daily by APP leaders just to discredit the evidence in opposition to their misdeeds,” the company said.
ED takes legal action against Atishi.Â
Henceforth, interrogation of all of the accused people was performed with audio-video recording, which included that of Sh Sanjay Singh. In view of these false, baseless, malicious allegations by using Smt Atishi Marlena, AAP Minister, the Directorate of Enforcement can also take extreme legal action,” the ED stated.
Atishi alleged that the principal probe enterprise had deleted audio from CCTV footage of interrogation in connection with the liquor policy case. The Minister stated the ruling BJP became the usage of the ED to “scare and silence” AAP by carrying out raids.
Why was legal action taken against Atishi?Â
A few days before, a file filled against accused. He was made to confront a central authority witness by the ED, and it had occurred in a room where there was a CCTV digital camera. He moved an application because the statement submitted by ED in the courtroom was exceptional from what had transpired in that room,” she alleged.Â
We demand ED give audio and video recordings, she said.
Questioning the probe business enterprise, she stated, “I even have two questions — What does the ED need to hide? How many statements have been recorded using ED, how many of them are on digicam, and out of those, which of the statements have audio recordings?”
ConclusionÂ
The audio are deleted by ED during interrogation. We have learnt from reliable sources that ED has deleted audio recordings of one-and-half of years of interrogation carried through it in the case,” she alleged and challenged the probe company to produce the recordings in the courtroom.
