A fresh controversy erupted in Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case, after it came to light that the statement of a former official of the Ministry of Home Affairs, recorded by the Special Investigation Team, contradicted the contents of a letter that he had addressed to senior officials in the department he is posted at present.
The SIT copy of R V S Mani’s statement, seen by Express, revealed the flaws in the facts recorded. The SIT grilled Mani on June 22. Two days later, he forewarned senior officials that despite placing the facts before the investigators, the SIT dictated a note that was factually incorrect and he therefore refused to sign it.
The SIT copy proved what Mani said in his letter to the seniors.
It said Mani had confirmed the role of Intelligence Bureau officials in drafting MHA’s affidavit in the case in 2009.
However, Mani had denied this fact, while informing his superiors in land and development office through a letter that the SIT was coercing him to sign facts that would falsely indict senior officials.
The SIT document quoting Mani said: “I state that the facts or statements made in the said affidavit are based only on the inputs made available by the Intelligence Bureau. The draft of the said affidavit was also submitted by the IB and the same was discussed in the Director (Internal Security) cabin in the presence of two IB officials. I do not recollect the name of the said officers.”
However, in his letter to the Joint Secretary (Land and Work) dated June 24, Mani said: “He (IG SIT Satish Verma) asked me whether this affidavit filed on 6.8.2009 was brought as a draft by Rajinder Kumar (IB officer), which was then submitted for approval. I said it is not the case.”
“He asked me who brought this affidavit. I said Director (IS) being an Income Tax officer as well as my being a qualified lawyer do not require any other person to draft it for us.... It was explained to him that generally myself and Director (IS) used to draft affidavits together.”