Holding that “custodial interrogation is indispensable as mere questioning may not yield the effective results”, a special CBI court in Chandigarh on Monday granted seven days’ police custody of suspended Punjab Vigilance Bureau reader Om Prakash Singh Rana in a bribery case being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).Special Judge Bhawna Jain allowed the CBI’s plea seeking police remand till June 8 after observing that Rana’s custodial interrogation appeared necessary for the recovery of electronic devices and digital evidence, the identification of the larger conspiracy and other beneficiaries, and verification regarding the alleged misuse of confidential vigilance information.Rana, who had surrendered before the trial court earlier in the day pursuant to an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, was represented by Advocate Sumesh Jain. The CBI was represented by Public Prosecutor Narender Singh, assisted by Inspector Kuldeep Singh of CBI ACB Chandigarh.Seeking seven days of custody, the CBI submitted that a complaint against Amit Kumar, state tax officer, Malout, was pending before the office of the DGP (Vigilance), Punjab, and that co-accused Vikas Goyal and Raghav Goyal facilitated a meeting between the complainant and Rana, who was then serving as Reader to the DGP (Vigilance).According to the agency, Rana allegedly showed the complainant the vigilance complaint pending against him and thereafter the complainant was taken to a guest house in Sector 30, Chandigarh, where co-accused Vikas and Raghav allegedly demanded illegal gratification of Rs 20 lakh on behalf of Rana and other senior officers for closure of the complaint.The CBI further submitted that co-accused Ankit Wadhwa, stated to be the driver of Raghav, collected the bribe money and a mobile handset and was apprehended during a trap operation.Also Read | Punjab Vigilance bribery case: CBI arrests 3; Reader to VB chief abscondingReferring to digital evidence, the prosecution submitted that “…Whatsapp chats reveal the active involvement of Rana with co-accused Raghav and Vikas in the conspiracy and even the make, model and the colour of the above said mobile handset purchased by the complainant as per demand, was shared by Raghav with Rana”.Story continues below this adThe CBI further submitted that Raghav also shared the complaint made against Amit Kumar with accused Rana through Whatsapp, which “establishes his active knowledge, participation and intention in the commission of the said offence”.The agency also argued that Rana had remained absconding after registration of the case and did not join the investigation even after dismissal of his anticipatory bail application by the trial court. The prosecution submitted that after he joined in the investigation with the court’s permission on Monday, “he did not disclose anything and did not co-operate, nor did he disclose anything regarding whereabouts of his mobile phones and gave evasive and vague replies”.The CBI told the court that custodial interrogation was required “to unearth the larger criminal conspiracy and ascertain the nexus between private middlemen and public servants involved in the commission of offence”, trace the money trail, recover mobile phones and electronic gadgets, retrieve deleted WhatsApp chats, confront the accused with co-accused and witnesses, identify facilitators, investigate alleged leakage of confidential vigilance information and ascertain whether similar acts of corruption or extortion had been committed with other persons.Opposing the remand plea only on the question of duration, counsel for Rana argued that seven days’ police custody was unwarranted. The defence submitted that the accused was ready to facilitate the investigation, that only digital devices were to be recovered, and that confrontation with co-accused could be carried out while they remained in judicial custody. It was argued that one day’s police custody would be sufficient.Story continues below this adAfter considering the rival submissions, the court observed that “the custodial interrogation of Rana… seems to be necessary for fair investigation of the case”.The court further noted that Rana had failed to surrender or join the investigation despite dismissal of his anticipatory bail plea and remained on the run until his surrender on Monday. It also observed that the seven-day period sought by the CBI did not appear excessive “keeping in view the nature of the offence, conduct of the accused, his position, his contacts/links and the nature of the evidence which is to be collected at his instance”.Allowing the CBI’s application, the court remanded Rana to police custody till June 8 and directed the investigating agency to produce him before the court on that date. The court also directed that he be provided all necessary medication as per prescription and permitted him to meet his lawyer, Amardeep Singh Saran, daily from 5 pm to 5.30 pm during the period of police remand, within the sight of a CBI officer.Meanwhile, Rana’s application seeking regular bail was declined at this stage.