CBI told to file report in photo morphing case

November 08, 2014 10:40 am | Updated 10:41 am IST - NEW DELHI:

NEW DELHI, 24/04/2013:BJP leader Najma Heptullah in New Delhi on April 24, 2013. Photo: Shiv Kumar Pushpakar.

NEW DELHI, 24/04/2013:BJP leader Najma Heptullah in New Delhi on April 24, 2013. Photo: Shiv Kumar Pushpakar.

The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file a status report in a case relating to alleged morphing of a photograph of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Union Minister of Minority Affairs Najma Heptulla, carried in an Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR) publication. Ms. Heptulla was heading the ICCR when the book was published.

Justice Vibhu Bakhru of the High Court, who had earlier issued notices to the CBI and others on a writ petition seeking directions to bring to a logical end the preliminary enquiry into the case, asked the investigating agency to file its report by November 14. Other respondents in the case are the Union Government and the ICCR.

The writ petition has been filed by Firoz Bakht Ahmed, grandnephew of Maulana Azad. Ms. Heptulla appeared with the Maulana – who was the country’s first Education Minister – in the photo, which was later withdrawn.

The petitioner alleged that the photo, showing Ms. Heptulla seated with Maulana Azad after her graduation, was morphed as Ms. Heptulla had graduated in May 1958, three months after the Maulana’s death. The publication, since withdrawn, was titled “Journey of a Legend: Maulana Abul Kalam Azad 1888-1958”.

The High Court had in 2006 directed the CBI in a public interest litigation to probe the allegations and complete the investigation expeditiously. Mr. Ahmed said in his petition that the investigating agency had neither concluded the probe despite the lapse of nine years nor made the outcome of its probe known.

According to the petitioner, though the queries under the Right to Information Act were being sent to the CBI since 2008 for knowing the preliminary inquiry’s findings, the CBI had not replied on the pretext that it was exempted from the purview of the RTI Act or was unanswerable under Section 8 (1) (h) of the Act.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.