Moments after Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) supremo Lalu Prasad Yadav was found guilty by a special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court in connection with the fodder scam, the party expressed its disappointment in the verdict, alleging conspiracy against him.”I believe in the judiciary, but in this case, the CBI was arranging prosecution. Legally admissible evidence provided by us were set aside,” RJD leader Manoj Jha said in a press conference here.Jha emphasised on the fact that some of the shreds of evidence they provided were set aside.”We believe in the judicial architecture and this is not the end of the road. The kind of evidence we have, we’ll get redressal at a higher court. Politically I know this regime, they have this typical Standard Operating Procedure: Try to make a deal with your opposition, if you fail, then scare them”, added Jha.Speaking about the “two most powerful people in India”, Jha asserted, “They are trying to scare and intimidate us and I want to tell them- Do whatever you want, your end has begun.”He also said the CBI has become a motorized parrot and the control mechanism in the hands of two most powerful people in the country.He claimed that Lalu became a victim of a well-webbed conspiracy, adding, “We believe the judiciary system and we will go in the court and clear everything and the truth will prevail.”The former Bihar chief minister was brought to Birsa Munda Central Jail after a special CBI court’s verdict.Fourteen others have also been found guilty, while seven accused have been acquitted, including former Bihar CM Jagannath Mishra.The court is scheduled to pronounce the quantum sentence on January 3, 2018, for the 15 guilty, including Lalu Prasad.Lalu has been convicted in the case relating to embezzling of more than Rs 89 lakh from the Deoghar Treasury between 1991 and 1994.Apart from Lalu, Mishra and 20 others accused were present in the court of special CBI judge Shivpal Singh.Justice Singh had completed hearing the case on December 13 and asked all accused in the case to remain present in court for the judgment.
Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>
Read original article: