|
An audio recording presented before the Delhi High Court allegedly captures a senior Anti-Corruption Branch officer acknowledging efforts to frame a judge in response to judicial orders critical of the agency's conduct.
Serious allegations of misuse of power have rocked the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) following revelations that the ACB registered a First Information Report (FIR) against court staff of the Special Judge dealing with its cases as an act of retaliation. This comes after the Special Judge passed orders against the ACB's top officials in ongoing matters. According to the audio, the ACP of the Anti-Corruption Bureau is heard stating that the "practical sense" of the framing of the judge was that there was a series of orders questioning the investigations being carried out by the Anti-Corruption Branch. ACP also clarified in the tape that the orders of the judge were adverse and that the judge had directed the replacement of the investigating officer. The judge is heard saying that he had nothing personal against the officers of ACB and that they could have challenged the orders on the judicial side instead of trying to implicate him by lifting people from hospitals and forcing them to write statements against the court. The officer of the Anti-Corruption Branch made a veiled threat that if orders continue to be passed against the officers of the Branch, then there will be consequences. ACP is heard saying that he is revealing these facts to the judge on "humanitarian grounds". In the matter, the court staff has petitioned the Delhi High Court for an independent investigation and alleged that the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) falsely lodged an FIR to frame the judge. Ahmad, who was posted in the Special Judge's court from September 2023 to March 2025, claims ACB officials threatened him during his tenure, forcing him to request a transfer in January 2025. He asserts that after the judge issued a contempt notice to the ACB on May 16, the agency registered a fabricated FIR against him and attempted to implicate the judge. The trial court judge recently denied his anticipatory bail on May 22 but directed ACB to follow due process if making an arrest. Ahmad has since filed a writ petition seeking the transfer of the probe to an independent agency. The Delhi High Court has ordered the State to submit a status report by May 29. On February 14, the High Court rejected ACB's request to investigate the judge for bribery, citing a lack of evidence. It allowed ACB to continue its probe but required further proof before reopening the matter. The judge was transferred to another district on May 20 via an administrative order. Ahmad seeks to quash the FIR or transfer the case to the CBI for a fair investigation. His counsel argues that the FIR was registered after the judge's May 15 contempt notice and accuses ACB officials of corruption, intimidation, document forgery, and misuse of authority. (ANI)
|
