Bihar: SSP Patna admits 'arrest warrant was issued' against Law Minister Kartikeya Singh

In the latest update pertaining to the kidnapping charges against the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader and Bihar Law Minister Kartikeya Singh wherein an arrest warrant was issued against him in July but no action was taken, SSP Patna in a press release confirmed that a warrant was issued against the newly-appointed Bihar Law Minister on July 19.

In the press release, SSP Patna acknowledged that a warrant had been issued on July 19 against Karthikeya Singh and added that the Mokama police station had received it on July 31. The SSP for Patna's admission raises concerns about why it took 12 days for the warrant to travel merely a hundred kilometres from Danapur.

Additionally, Singh had to be detained and brought before the court by August 16 in accordance with the terms of the issued warrant in connection to a kidnapping case of Rajiv Ranjan Singh which took place in the year 2014. However, the RJD leader was not subject to any police action in the interim. On the other side, Singh once more challenged the High Court's decision by requesting anticipatory bail in the lower court, which resulted in the arrest being stayed till September 01. It is pertinent to mention that the government of Mahagathbandhan was formed on 10th August and on 12th August Karthik Kumar took relief from the court.

'No such case against me': Kartikeya Singh

Notably, the Bihar Law Minister speaking exclusively to Republic TV on Wednesday, cited the affidavit filed before contesting the elections and said, "The first thing is that no such case against me. I have mentioned everything in my affidavit. Anyone who fights elections provides details about cases against them in the affidavit. Making an allegation and proving the allegation are two different things."

Meanwhile, former Union Minister and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad, demanding the resignation of the Law Minister, said, “On recovery of victim Rajiv Ranjan Singh, he has given a statement under section 164 CrPC describing in detail the manner in which he was kidnapped and he has fully described the role played by the petitioner and who is the petitioner here? Kartikeya Singh. This means the victim has explained before the magistrate the role played by Kartikeya Singh.”  

He further asked the Singh to surrender before the court. "The Law Minister Kartikeya Singh should have surrendered," said Prasad, citing the court document which read, “The petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and make a prayer for regular bail. Why hasn't he surrendered?”