Former Mumbai police chief Param Bir Singh

MUMBAI: The ongoing spat between former home minister Anil Deshmukh and deputy CM Devendra Fadnavis took a new turn on Monday. After Deshmukh said in Nagpur that charges of corruption had been levelled against him following a deal between between former Mumbai police chief Param Bir Singh and Fadnavis, Singh waded into the controversy, saying “criminals were meeting Anil Deshmukh at his official residence when he was home minister in the presence of the then DGP”.
Singh said Deshmukh’s son Salil, too, had met him after he made corruption charges against the then home minister, saying if cases against his father were withdrawn, he “would make Singh the DGP”. Salil denied the statement, saying Singh has no credibility.

Singh said he was being unnecessarily dragged into the political war. “Whatever I had to say, I had submitted it in court. Unfortunately, the former home minister is dragging me into the controversy.”
Singh accused Deshmukh of making several baseless allegations against him and alleged that the then DGP had threatened him with consequences if his complaint of corruption against Deshmukh was not withdrawn. “I had then recorded the entire conversation I had with the DGP and submitted it to SC. I am prepared for the narco test, provided Deshmukh, Sanjay Pande and Salil are prepared for it,” he said.
Following Singh’s complaint in 2021, the then govt led by Uddhav Thackeray had set up a commission headed by Justice K U Chandiwal to probe the corruption charges against Deshmukh. While the commission was set up on March 30, 2021, it submitted its report to Thackeray on April 26, 2022, but it was not made public. Before the panel, Singh denied the charges he made against Deshmukh, saying he didn’t have any evidence for it and it was based on hearsay. He had then alleged that Deshmukh had asked him to mobilise Rs 100 crore from bar and restaurant owners.
The then home minister Dilip Walse Patil confirmed that the report was submitted to Thackeray in his presence, but he had no occasion to see it as it was in a sealed envelope. “As per procedure, it was submitted to the general administration department. I don’t know what happened to the report after that,” he said.