CBI should find who gave, received money: Narada petitioners

Petitioners in the Narada sting operation case today told the Calcutta High Court that a CBI investigation should be ordered to find out who offered and received money.
The petitioners' counsel submitted before the division bench of acting Chief Justice Nishita Mhatre and Justice T Chakraborty that the issue had an impact on the people at large as public figures, including ministers, MPs and MLAs of Trinamool Congress, were purportedly seen accepting money in the tapes and that a proper investigation was required to unravel the truth.
The issue is dangerous if the allegations are true and equally dangerous if the allegations are found not to be true, counsel Bikash Bhattacharya submitted referring to earlier observations by a bench headed by then Chief Justice Manjula Chellur.

Alleging that the West Bengal government has been siding with these leaders, who are respondents in one of the three PILs seeking a CBI probe into the allegations of the leaders taking money, Bhattacharya prayed that an investigation be conducted by CBI to find out who gave and received money.
Mathew Samuel, editor of Narada News, had claimed to have conducted the sting operation by giving money to the leaders in the name of a fictitious company called Impex International set up by him.
On a query by the court as to why there was a delay on the part of Samuel of two years in making public the video tapes after having recorded those in 2014, Bhattacharya submitted that it was for the investigating agency to find out.

He stated that as a petitioner in a PIL, his job was to bring the matter to the notice of the court and to find out everything, an investigation was required.
Counsels for some TMC leaders have claimed before the bench that there was a mala fide design on the part of Samuel to malign the TMC by making public the videos just before the Assembly elections in West Bengal was announced.
Contesting the contention of various lawyers, who appeared for the TMC leaders opposing CBI probe, Bhattacharya submitted that the Prevention of Corruption Act does not say that there has to be a demand for money in order to make acceptance of the money a cognisable offence.