The CBI Court Chandigarh has allowed an application filed by OP Rana, the reader to Director General of Punjab (DGP) Vigilance Bureau, for issuing direction to the Investigating Officer of the CВI, Chandigarh, to immediately collect, seize and preserve the complete DVR/CCTV video footage recorded on May 11, 2026, at the premises of Sham Fashion Mall, Sector 34, Chandigarh, and Disha Florist, Sector 35, Chandigarh.
The court pronounced the order on an application of Rana filed through advocate Harsh Mohan Singh. In the application Rana said that he has been falsely implicated as an accused in the FIR registered by the CBI, Chandigarh.
The counsel argued that according to the prosecution case, the alleged offence is stated to have taken place on May 11, 2026. In order to bring out truth facts and substantiate the innocence of the applicant, the CCTV/video footage of Sham Fashion Mall and Disha Florist is necessary.
He said that both the premises have CCTV cameras installed and, therefore, the entire day’s movements would have been recorded.
He added that the digital recordings of the aforementioned locations for the entire duration of May 11 are highly critical and essential to disprove the false allegations levelled against him.
The CBI arrested three accused Raghav Goyal, Vikas @Vicky Goyal and Ankit Wadhwa in the case registered by the CBI on a complaint filed by a State Tax officer Malout. The CBI claimed that a case against complainant Amit Kumar was pending with the Vigilance Punjab and accused Vikas Goyal and Raghav Goyal facilitated the meeting of the complainant with O P Rana, in his office on April 29, 2026, who demanded Rs 20 lakh and a mobile handset of Samsung Galaxy for himself.
The CBI claimed that during the trap, accused co-accused Ankit Wadhwa was arrested with Rs 13 lakh and mobile phone and Rana managed to escape. Other two accused Raghav Goyal and Vikas Goyal were arrested later.
Counsel of the accused argued that the claim of the CBI that the accused ran away from the spot is false. The accused was away for shopping and thereafter he was supposed to attend a birthday party of a relative. After hearing of the arguments, the court allowed the application of the accused.
