Shanthi Bhushan CD Controversy Takes Murkier Turn
posted on Apr 22, 2011 @ 10:11AM
Following the CFSL's findings, the Bhushan tape controversy has taken a murkier turn. The Central Forensic Sciences Laboratory report claimed that the "recorded conversation is in continuity... no abrupt changes in speech signal detected". Earlier, forensic tests carried out by the Bhushans through two private laboratories - one in Hyderabad and the other in the United States, had determined that the tape's contents had been spliced. Questions had also been raised by detractors of Mr Shanti Bhushan, co-chairperson of the joint drafting committee on the Lokpal Bill, over his alleged reference to an amount of 4 crores in the recorded conversation. The CD case has now been transferred to the special cell of the Delhi police for further investigation. It is learnt that the Bhushans might be called in for questioning.
In the meanwhile, the Uttar Pradesh state administration issued a notice to Mr Shanti Bhushan and his three children for allegedly evading stamp duty to the tune of 1.3 crore on purchase of property in a prime locality in the state, has, sent a reminder to the family on the issue. Referring to CFSL report, former Samajwadi leader, Mr Amar Singh said, "That the voice was his... has even been admitted by Shanti Bhushan. In what context was he talking about that amount? This particular remark is lethal and dangerous." The CD and its transcripts were earlier shown to Mr Shanti Bhushan. The police said That it was sealed before him and his signature was also taken. The police is also looking out for the original CD in order to compare it with the copies.
Reacting to the CFSL report Mr. Prashanth Bhushan, the lawyer son of Shanthi Bhushan said "Nobody appears to have seen the report yet, if the CFSL has indeed given such a report, it would be obvious that the government is involved in this smear campaign. All of Mulayam Singh's voice in this CD has been lifted from Amar Singh's conversation with Mulayam Singh Yadav, which had been filed by me in the Supreme Court in 2006." Distancing himself with the whole issue, anti-corruption crusader said "the controversy has nothing to do with me."