LUCKNOW: Cracking a railway scam in 1993 proved costly to a CBI officer in Lucknow’s Hazratganj on Friday when an iron-tipped traditional arrow pierced his chest in broad daylight.
The incident occurred in Lucknow’s one of the busiest localities at Nawal Kishore Road in Hazratganj where the CBI office is located.
As per the eyewitness account, a man, who emerged from behind a tree, aimed an iron-tipped arrow on a wooden bow, and released directly at CBI ASI Virendra Singh, piercing his chest and knocking him to the ground.
The accused, identified as Dinesh Murmu, 45, a former railway employee from Khadagpur, Munger district in Bihar, was immediately overpowered by onlookers and handed over to police.
As per the sources, Murmu, now 65, nurtured a grudge against Singh who had led the probe into a 1993 CBI-led railway trap case owing to which Murmu had to lose his job three decades ago.
Murmu, reportedly from a tribal community and worked as a junior employee in Indian Railways, returned to his village after his dismissal and led a life in hardships. Preliminary questioning suggested that he spent months preparing for the attack and may have even practised using the weapon in isolated forested areas.
According to police, the attacker used a handmade wooden bow and a sharpened metal arrow, reportedly crafted specifically for the assault. He waited behind a tree near the CBI gate, timing the attack for maximum impact as Singh stood momentarily alone.
Singh was rushed to Lucknow’s Civil Hospital with a five-centimetre wound to the left side of his chest. Chief Medical Superintendent Dr Rajesh Srivastava confirmed Singh was in a stable condition and under continuous observation. “If the arrow struck just slightly to the right, it could have pierced a major artery or even the heart,” he said.
CBI officers are also reviewing whether Singh received any threats in recent months, or if there were signs of surveillance prior to the attack.
Meanwhile, Murmu was booked for attempted murder and assault on a public servant, with further charges likely under the Arms Act and other relevant sections.