Param Bir Singh sought my help, his intentions ‘dishonest, mala fide’: Maharashtra DGP

Spread the love


In a plea filed before the Supreme Court, Maharashtra DGP Sanjay Pandey has said that Param Bir Singh’s conduct with him when Pandey is alleged to have told the former Mumbai police commissioner to withdraw his letter against former home minister Anil Deshmukh was “dishonest, mala fide and with the ulterior motive of creating a false record and narrative.”

Singh had recorded a conversation between him and Pandey in which the latter allegedly offered to resolve the issue between the former and the Maharashtra government after Singh wrote to the chief minister raising bribery charges against Deshmukh. Pandey, Singh claimed, had asked him to withdraw the letter so the issue could be resolved.

Pandey said that after he came to know about Singh’s allegations, he immediately recused himself from the enquiry he was conducting against Singh at the behest of the state government. Pandey further said, “The petitioner has indulged in blatant falsehoods with regards to the content and context in which certain conversations/ interaction did take place between the petitioner and respondent on 15th April 2021 and 18th April 2021”.

Regarding his meeting with Singh in his office, Pandey says in the petition, “Though tried to be explained away as a ‘call on’ visit, the petitioner represented to me that he was meeting me in my capacity as a senior officer…and he was the one who pleaded for my ‘help’. I say that I did not volunteer or gratuitously offer any advice, or to intercede.”

He adds, “The petitioner specifically informed me that he was in great “tension” over his actions of having issued a letter dated 20th March 2021 to the Chief Minister of the state of Maharashtra and the resultant fallout of his actions. The petitioner also expressed that he regretted doing so and begged me for my guidance and for a solution to the predicament that the petitioner said he was in.”

Pandey explains that it was in this context that the conversation between Singh and him took place and his help was sought. He further added that the petitioner had suppressed crucial facts and documents from the court with regard to Singh’s repeated attempts to communicate with him. He further called the “narrative of the petitioner” a “blatant concoction to suit his own false narrative with clear ulterior motives”.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to top