Bengaluru: The CID, probing the Sub-Inspector scam in Karnataka, is all set to conduct a lie-detector test (polygraph) on arrested ADGP Amrit Paul in the absence of cooperation from him, sources in the investigation agency said on Thursday.
According to Criminal Investigation Department (CID) officers, Paul is not forthcoming with answers and remains tight-lipped or gives one-word answers during interrogation. The CID, which had made submissions in this regard, is confident of getting consent from the court to subject Paul to a lie-detector test.
The arrested ADGP has refused to give his consent for the test. The sleuths likened the scandal to the 'Vyapam' medical courses entrance test scam of Madhya Pradesh where the chief had colluded with the accused to carry out the scandal. A bunch of strong room keys was allegedly given by the arrested ADGP who was then in charge of recruitment, to the accused to manipulate answer sheets.
Also Read: Karnataka PSI recruitment scam: CID submits chargesheet
Two of his junior officers have revealed his role in the scandal and are being threatened by him, the sources said. The investigation officers maintain that they will have to interrogate Amrit Paul in four other FIRs, which would bring out the collusion of senior politicians from the ruling BJP and opposition Congress parties.
First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) court will pronounce its order on subjecting Amrit Paul to a lie detector test on Friday. Meanwhile, seven accused have approached the High Court seeking bail, and an order in this regard is also likely to be given on Friday.
CID sleuths had submitted a 1,975-page charge sheet against 34 accused before the court in connection with the sensational Police scandal. The Karnataka government had announced re-exams for 545 PSI posts after the scandal came to light. The exams were held for these posts on October 3, 2021.
As many as 54,041 candidates appeared for exams. The results were announced this January. Later, the allegations surfaced that candidates who gave very poor performance in descriptive writing scored maximum marks in Paper 2. (IANS)
