The counsel for the plaintiff made a conclusive statement at the court that ‘the 52nd Dai had not conferred nass on the defendant either on June 4 or 20, 2011 and the appointment was only attributed to him.’ The senior counsel for the plaintiff while dislodging the claim of the defendant and other defence witnesses, reiterated that the audio recording of June 4, 2011 nass was not made on that day.
Read more at Hindustan Times: ‘52nd Dai did not confer nass on defendant’