CBI withdraws plea seeking voice samples of DHFL ex-promoter Dheeraj Wadhawan

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Saturday withdrew a plea seeking voice samples of Dheeraj Wadhawan, presently in Judicial custody in connection with an alleged bank fraud of Rs 34,615 crore by M/s Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL).

Special Judge Vishal Gogne on Saturday allowed CBI to withdraw the application regarding the voice sample of Dheeraj Wadhawan and said that the application seeking a voice sample is dismissed as withdrawn. On Saturday, when the application was listed for final disposal, CBI moved an application seeking withdrawal of the application for voice sample permission and sought liberty to file the same afresh when required.

The application was strongly opposed by advocate Vijay Aggarwal who appeared for Dheeraj Wadhawan.

CBI had mentioned in the application stating that Wadhawan and other unknown persons including public servants entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the consortium of 17 banks led by Union Bank of India and in pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy the said accused persons/entities induced the consortium banks to sanction huge loans aggregating to Rs 42,000 crore (approx) and siphoned off and misappropriated a significant portion of the said funds by falsifying the books of account of the DHFL and deliberately and dishonestly defaulted on repayment of the legitimate dues of the said consortium banks and thereby caused a wrongful loss of Rs 34,000 crore to the consortium lenders during the period January 2010 to December 2019.

Further CBI stated that during the investigation certain incriminating digital devices were recovered after being analysed and it was felt that the sample voice of accused Dheeraj Wadhawan is essentially required for comparison of his voice with the incriminating voice contents found in a digital device.

CBI also submitted that Dheeraj Wadhawan was explained the purpose of taking his specimen voice in the presence of an independent witness and despite explaining to him the relevancy and requirement of obtaining a sample/specimen of his voice, he declined to give his specimen voice in the presence of an independent witness and to that effect, a memorandum was drawn. Therefore, it was argued that he is being non-cooperative.

Advocate Vijay Aggarwal along with Advocate Yugant Sharma appearing for Dheeraj Wadhawan stated that his client's refusal to give a voice sample does not show non-cooperation and the same can be taken during further interrogation.

Advocate Aggarwal also filed a detailed reply to the said application and stated that the alleged voice recording in possession of the prosecution cannot be termed to be primary evidence as the record has not been subjected to analysis and without a source there is no authenticity, he further supplemented his arguments by stating that CBI has not produced the alleged voice recording before the Court for the perusal of the Court whether the content of the alleged digital evidence collected by the CBI is legal or illegal.

( With inputs from ANI )