Gujarat IAS officer Pradeep Sharma on Saturday moved the Supreme Court seeking that a CBI probe be launched into the snooping charges against former Home Minister Amit Shah and Chief Minister Narendra Modi based on the transcripts of telephonic conversations posted on Cobrapost and Gulail websites.
Mr. Sharma’s petition for a CBI probe in respect of the cases filed against him by the Gujarat government has already been posted for final hearing on December 6 and he has filed the present application in the same petition. He said the websites had released tapes of the telephonic conversation between Mr. Shah, the then Minister of State for Home and G.L. Singhal IPS, who was serving as the Superintendent of Police, Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS) in Ahmedabad.
“The said conversations are during the period from August-September, 2009, when Mr. Singhal was reporting to Mr. Shah. The transcripts of the taped conversations reveal that the said lady architect and the applicant were placed under an all-pervasive and intrusive surveillance at the behest of a person referred to as “Saheb” by Mr. Shah. There is [not an] iota of doubt that the person referred to as “Saheb” by Mr. Shah in the tapes/transcripts [is] Narendra Modi. The said tapes/transcripts reveal a strong bias and prejudice of the State of Gujarat against the applicant and the State’s intent to somehow implicate him in criminal offences.”
He said when he filed the writ petition he did not have a copy of the transcripts and the present transcripts now confirm his apprehension as stated in the petition.
According to newspaper reports, the explanation given for such extensive surveillance was that it was made on the oral request of the father of the said female architect. However, he said “this explanation seems absolutely [incredible] in the light of the contents of the conversations that Mr. Shah had with Mr. Singhal, which clearly reveal that the surveillance was extremely intrusive and hostile and not as innocuous and benign as sought to be made [out].”
‘No absolution for Modi’
Mr. Sharma said, “… The explanation of the so called request from the father of the female architect is a mere afterthought and the purported ‘no objection’ by the father does not absolve Mr. Modi, Mr. Shah and other guilty persons from committing violations of the applicable laws.”
Mr. Sharma made similar allegations against Mr. Modi, linking him with a woman, and when it was pointed out that the allegations were intended to malign the Chief Minister, the court had directed the petitioner to delete the objectionable portions. In the present application, Mr. Sharma has again referred to the same allegations. He sought a direction to the CBI to register an FIR and conduct a thorough enquiry into the violation of the Telegraph Act, 1885, and other applicable laws by Mr. Modi, Mr. Amit Shah and any other such persons.
