The officers were earlier issued notices on Feb 5 and asked to submit their replies by Feb 12. The latest letters, sent by the Delhi assembly secretary to the three officers on Saturday, stated that their comments had not been received.The letters said the privileges committee chairperson directed that “matters of privilege are particular to the person to whom these are addressed and replies/comments have to be submitted by that person to the committee. These are not to be treated as departmental correspondence and any delay in this regard shall not be condoned.”“Needless to say, delay or denial in furnishing information/documents sought by the committee, in itself, constitutes a breach of privilege and contempt,” the letters added.The letter to the ACS (home) also stated that the committee had sought a copy of the complaint and enclosures on the basis of which the FIR was registered; a copy of the FIR; the report of the social media expert of the technical cell, Punjab Police; and the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab. “However, neither your comments nor the information/documents were received by this secretariat within the stipulated time,” it added.On Friday, the office of the Punjab ACS (home) wrote to the Delhi assembly secretariat that prior to receipt of the Feb 5 communication, the home department had not received any direct correspondence from the Delhi legislative assembly secretariat.It stated that the comments of the Punjab DGP, Jalandhar CP, and FSL director were sent by them in response to letters directly addressed to them by the Delhi legislative assembly secretariat and were forwarded by the home department after obtaining approval of the competent authority. “The formal reply of the additional chief secretary, department of home affairs, govt of Punjab, on the above lines has already been submitted for approval of the competent authority and will be sent once approved,” the communication said.The Punjab home department also forwarded a communication from the Punjab DGP to the ACS (home), stating that written comments had earlier been submitted to the Delhi assembly secretary with the approval of the state govt and seeking further instructions.The FIR in the case related to Atishi’s video was registered late on Jan 7, hours after BJP, Shiromani Akali Dal, and Congress leaders shared it. The complainant, Iqbal Singh alias I S Bagga, an AAP worker, named Kapil Mishra, SAD president Sukhbir Singh Badal, Congress MLAs Pargat Singh and Sukhpal Singh Khaira, and “other persons” in his complaint, though police did not explicitly list them as accused. Police issued a statement on Jan 9 on the FIR, drawing a strong reaction from the Delhi speaker the same day.Atishi video row: Key datesJan 7: FIR registered in Jalandhar over alleged doctored videoJan 9: Police statement draws strong reaction from Delhi speakerFeb 5: Delhi assembly privileges panel issues notices to Punjab ACS (home), DGP, Jalandhar CPFeb 12: Initial deadline for replies lapsesFeb 15: Panel sends fresh letters, terms it ‘final opportunity’Feb 20: New deadline for submission of replies
