PTIMumbai: The Mumbai police probing the television rating point (TRP) manipulation case has recorded confessional statements of at least four witnesses before a magistrate. This was done along with video recordings of their statements and those of other witnesses before the police, sources in the know told ET.
In their video-recorded statements before the police, the witnesses have told investigators that they were bribed by the arrested accused to watch Republic TV, the sources added.
According to sources, confessional statements include those of the households where the compromised bar-o-meters were installed by the arrested accused.
“Confessional statements of other witnesses including company officials who are critical to the probe and help string the entire conspiracy together will also be recorded,” said a senior police officer privy to the development of the case.
While a statement recorded under Section 161of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) –– recorded before a police officer –– is not admissible as evidence in a court of law; that under section 164 of the CrPC before a magistrate is, provided it is corroborated by other evidence.
“Owing to the sensitive nature of the case, the witness statements were video recorded by the police. While it might not be admissible as primary evidence, it could act as corroborative evidence,” said another senior official privy to the probe detail.
“Statements under 164 have also been recorded,” added the official. In a related development, Republic TV editor Arnab Goswami against whom the Mumbai police had commenced ‘chapter proceedings’ by summoning him on Friday to execute a good behaviour bond, is unlikely to present himself before the adjudicating authority.
According to the notice issued on October 10 to Goswami under section 111of the CrPC, the Mumbai police has listed details of two first information reports (FIRs) registered against Goswami with the Mumbai police for allegedly inciting communal hatred and has showcaused him as to why he shouldn’t execute a good behaviour bond.
Legal sources familiar with the development told ET that the two FIRs mentioned in the notice have been suspended by the Bombay High Court (HC), hence the police action amounts to contempt of court.
“When the FIRs on the matter are suspended by the HC then initiating this process is ultra vires. This amounts to contempt of court and the same would be brought to the notice of the competent court. As far as honouring the summons are concerned, we will communicate to the executive magistrate at the appropriate time. There is no need for Gowami to appear before the adjudicating authority,” said a source privy to the development.
In their video-recorded statements before the police, the witnesses have told investigators that they were bribed by the arrested accused to watch Republic TV, the sources added.
According to sources, confessional statements include those of the households where the compromised bar-o-meters were installed by the arrested accused.
“Confessional statements of other witnesses including company officials who are critical to the probe and help string the entire conspiracy together will also be recorded,” said a senior police officer privy to the development of the case.
While a statement recorded under Section 161of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) –– recorded before a police officer –– is not admissible as evidence in a court of law; that under section 164 of the CrPC before a magistrate is, provided it is corroborated by other evidence.
“Owing to the sensitive nature of the case, the witness statements were video recorded by the police. While it might not be admissible as primary evidence, it could act as corroborative evidence,” said another senior official privy to the probe detail.
“Statements under 164 have also been recorded,” added the official. In a related development, Republic TV editor Arnab Goswami against whom the Mumbai police had commenced ‘chapter proceedings’ by summoning him on Friday to execute a good behaviour bond, is unlikely to present himself before the adjudicating authority.
According to the notice issued on October 10 to Goswami under section 111of the CrPC, the Mumbai police has listed details of two first information reports (FIRs) registered against Goswami with the Mumbai police for allegedly inciting communal hatred and has showcaused him as to why he shouldn’t execute a good behaviour bond.
Legal sources familiar with the development told ET that the two FIRs mentioned in the notice have been suspended by the Bombay High Court (HC), hence the police action amounts to contempt of court.
“When the FIRs on the matter are suspended by the HC then initiating this process is ultra vires. This amounts to contempt of court and the same would be brought to the notice of the competent court. As far as honouring the summons are concerned, we will communicate to the executive magistrate at the appropriate time. There is no need for Gowami to appear before the adjudicating authority,” said a source privy to the development.
Read More News on
Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily Market Updates & Live Business News.