Banerjee, who appeared before the state investigating agency on Thursday after skipping three earlier summonses and following directions from the Calcutta High Court, was questioned for several hours by a team of senior officers.
Banerjee replied “I do not know” to several questions relating to the disputed resolution submitted to the Assembly and allegedly lost his temper at certain stages, the officer claimed.
Also Read: Absconding TMC councillor in Kolkata booked for forgery, cheating
“Several questions relating to the resolution, the signatures appearing on it, and the supporting documents could not be conclusively addressed during questioning. Certain records sought by the investigating team are yet to be produced. He has, therefore, been asked to appear again on Sunday with relevant documents,” he told PTI.
Investigators sought clarification on how signatures of legislators who were allegedly absent from the party meeting appeared on the resolution, who had signed the document, and where the original copy was located, he said.
“The investigation is focused on establishing the authenticity of the documents and the circumstances under which they were prepared and submitted. Further verification is required before any conclusion can be drawn,” the officer added.On Thursday night, after leaving the CID headquarters, the TMC national general secretary went to party supremo Mamata Banerjee’s Kalighat residence, where he attended a meeting with several senior party leaders.
Also Read: ‘We will bring back Tatas in Bengal’: Suvendu Adhikari
He later left the residence without speaking to reporters.
On May 6, TMC legislators met at Banerjee’s Kalighat residence and proposed the name of Sovandeb Chattopadhyay for the post of Leader of the Opposition. Legislators present at the meeting reportedly expressed support by a show of hands.
The formal proposal, however, was not immediately submitted to the Assembly. Following the swearing-in of TMC MLAs on May 13 and 14, the Assembly Secretariat sought a resolution from the party naming its nominee for the post.
A fresh meeting was held on May 19, following which a document carrying signatures of 70 legislators in support of Chattopadhyay was submitted to the Assembly.
Questions were subsequently raised after discrepancies were allegedly noticed between signatures appearing on different documents submitted by TMC MLAs.
The matter eventually led to the registration of an FIR and a CID probe.
The state probe has already questioned several legislators in connection with the case.
