Then SP deposes before Naidu panel

CUTTACK: The then Rourkela SP Diptesh Patnaik, who has been under fire over handling of the alleged misbehaviour and assault of the then JMFC, Rourkela, Arun Kumar Patnaik by police inside the Udit Nagar Police Station in April, testified before the Justice A S Naidu Commission of Inquiry here on Sunday. Appearing before the Commission, Diptesh filed his affidavit submitting that he was not present at Rourkela on the day of the incident. He had been informed of the incident over phone and had immediately instructed the then additional SP, Rourkela, Ram Kumar Panda and other officers to rush to the Udit Nagar Police Station and look into the matter.  He also stated that on the night of April 2, Arun had even called him up on phone and expressed his intention to lodge an FIR against the police staff for alleged misdemeanour. Diptesh, however, refuted allegations that he had tried to talk the then JMFC into agreeing for a comprise to settle the matter. To a question regarding guidelines issued by the Apex Court on the duty of police towards general public as well as judicial officers, Diptesh replied he did not possess concrete knowledge on the issue. The then SP appeared before the Commission through his lawyer P K Nanda and was cross- examined extensively by S C Mohapatra, advocate for the then JMFC, and advocate for Rourkela Bar Association B P Tripathy.  The Commission also examined the DSP and investigating officer of the cases registered at the Udit Nagar Police Station in connection with the incident S C Pathy. The DSP submitted that he had examined the relevant witnesses during investigation of the case. Earlier the Commission had examined 14 witnesses who had filed affidavits about the incident. The witnesses so far cross-examined  have acknowledged the presence of the magistrate at the police station on the date. Some have even alleged that the magistrate had been using abusive language in the police station. However, the statements have been laced with contradictions and discrepancies. The FIR filed by the then IIC SN Pujari, who is accused of misbehaving with the magistrate, is also contradictory in many aspects.