While the CBI maintained that it did not consider necessary to record the statement of Tripathy under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code after having an elaborate discussion, the former DGP in his affidavit disputed the contention of the investigating agency by stating that there was no elaborate discussion regarding the case.

It may be mentioned here that the Orissa High Court had directed specifically the former DGP to file an affidavit relating to his discussion with the CBI on the Anjana molestation case. The High Court direction came in response to a public interest writ petition by one KC Mohanty who had alleged that the CBI had not interrogated the former DGP.

Now it is upto the CBI, which had submitted before the High Court that it had`elaborate' discussion with Tripathy, to clarify whether the former DGP had discussed so many things as mentioned in his affidavit or not.

While the former DGP alleged that attempts were made to suppress the case at the highest level, neither the CBI nor the High Court have ever complained against the state police or its efficiency. Rather the High Court while handing over the case to the CBI had observed that it had no doubt about the efficiency of the state police. At no point of time the CBI had also any complaint against the police or the Government.

The High Court by not passing any order on the affidavit of the former DGP took a non-committal stand. It has left it to the discretion of the CBI to examine the merit of the contentions of Tripathy. The High Court quoting the counsel of the CBI noted that the CBI would take such action on the basis of the statement made in the affidavit as it might deem fit and proper. It is now upto the CBI to decide whether it will proceed on the affidavits when it hadno complaints against the state government.