Anant demands CBI probe against ASP for ‘framing him’ after release from jail

Patna: Former Bihar MLA Anant Singh, who walked out of the Beur central jail after acquittal by the Patna high court, demanded a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry against the then assistant superintendent of police (Barh) Lipi Singh and her “intentional action against him.”

Singh was sentenced to 10 years each in prison by a special MP/MLA court. On Wednesday, the Patna high court acquitted him in the two separate cases of the Arms Act and stringent UAPA. 

“If I am acquitted from the court, then Lipi Singh should be made an accused for framing me. So, I demand a CBI inquiry against her from the state government as well as the centre,” said Singh after his release. 

Singh walked out of the Beur jail at around 5.10am and reached his ancestral home in Barh. Singh’s supporters greeted him, a former MLA from Mokama for four consecutive terms. A large crowd of supporters was present outside the jail, accompanying him as they headed towards Mokam in rural Patna.

Also Read: Patna HC sets aside conviction of former MLA Anant Singh in two key cases

Singh and his supporters had then squarely blamed a conspiracy by Munger MP Rajiv Ranjan when grenades, an AK 47, 27 live cartridges, and rocket launchers were allegedly seized from his Singh’s ancestral residence, leading to the UAPA case.

The second case was related to the recovery of an INSAS rifle in 2015 from the official residence of the MLA in Patna. Singh was dismissed as the MLA following the first order of conviction passed on July 21, 2022.

Following his conviction, Singh moved the high court challenging the orders of the MP/MLA court, where justice Chandra Shekher Jha acquitted him in both cases on August 14, this year, due to a lack of evidence.

The court, in his 104-page order, said, “Having all such backgrounds, the political enmity and over-activism on part of ASP (Barh) cannot be ruled out straightaway. It also transpired from deposition of the prosecution witnesses that photography or videography of alleged raid, search and seizure were not made despite of having sufficient time as same was conducted for long 12 to 14 hours, which may be a best electronic evidence in this case, even no photograph or videography was done despite of availability of smart phone as it transpired from deposition of witnesses, which was denied on specific questions, All such evidences established beyond doubt that sealing of recovered weapons were not done properly to rule out any tampering and it was also not tested in proper manner as to suggest whether the recovered weapons were effective and functional which is a relevant fact to establish the case of prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.”