WhatsApp chats fabricated to implicate former CBI judge Sudhir Parmar, says counsel
Several district bar associations in Haryana suspended work on Friday to protest the arrest of suspended CBI judge Sudhir Parmar in a money-laundering case by the Enforcement Directorate
Even as several district bar associations in Haryana suspended work on Friday to protest the arrest of suspended CBI judge Sudhir Parmar in a money-laundering case by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), his counsel argued that he was implicated on the basis of WhatsApp chats that were fabricated, tampered and edited in a manner to create false evidence.
In a statement, Paramvir Parmar, the counsel for the suspended judicial officer, said that the latter had been accused of alleged favouritism in his treatment of real estate developers Roop Bansal and his brother Basant Bansal of M3M and Lalit Goyal of IREO Group, and abusing his official position to get undue favour by getting his nephew Ajay Parmar appointed as legal advisor in M3M at a package of about ₹12 lakh per annum.
“Sudhir Parmar was not posted in Panchkula or holding the charge of special court when his nephew got an appointment in M3M company. Therefore, the allegation of extending any favour to M3M is false. Sudhir Parmar has no hesitation to make mention of the fact that this false evidence has been created just for his implication,” the counsel said.
The counsel further said the allegation that Lalit Goyal, an accused in an ED case (ECIR number 10 of 2021), was also given favours by Sudhir Parmar was contrary to the facts and false.
“Sudhir Parmar took charge of the presiding officer of Special PMLA court and Special CBI judge at Panchkula in the third week of November, 2021. At that time, Lalit Goyal was already in remand. He was produced before Parmar for further police custody which was allowed. Thereafter, bail application of Lalit Goyal was also dismissed by Parmar. Even the application for medical treatment of Lalit Goyal from outside the jail was dismissed. Therefore, it cannot be said that Sudhir Parmar had extended any favour to Lalit Goyal.
The judge’s counsel said that ED had summoned Sudhir Parmar for questioning at 11 am on July 25 and let him go at 8.30 pm. “On that day, a number of questions were put to Parmar and most of them were irrelevant -- such as when did he join the service, where he remained posted, when he was promoted. Thereafter, on August 2, he was called by the ED at 3 pm and interrogated till 11.40 pm. This time too, no relevant question in respect to either ED case or FIR lodged by ACB were put to him. Sudhir Parmar had even objected to such type of questioning and specifically asked the investigating officer to prepare the questionnaire and send it to him for a reply. However, his request was not acceded to by ED officials, the counsel said.
“The ACB had inspected and searched the house of Parmar’s nephew and taken away a sum of ₹21 lakh, the details of which were duly explained to ACB even in the application moved by Sudhir Parmar before CJM, Panchkula,” the counsel said.