New Delhi, Jan. 9 (PTI): Anurag Singh, one of the accused in the Amar Singh phone-tapping case, has told police that Bhupendra, the first to be arrested, asked him to sell the CD containing recorded conversations of the Samajwadi Party leader to his political rivals.

“I have played no part in the tapping. Bhupendra, after acquiring the material on the tape, approached me and asked me to find buyers among Amar Singh’s political rivals,” Anurag, an owner of a detective agency, told the police. His statement was submitted to the additional chief metropolitan magistrate’s court here.

Anurag said “he had heard the tape but did not succeed in arranging a buyer”.

Special cell official Bhadrish Dutt, investigating the case, told the court that the laptop seized from Anurag, who allegedly used it to convert the recorded conversation to an audio CD, has been sent for examination to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad.

The police also submitted Bhupendra’s disclosure statement. However, details were not revealed.

The special cell told the court that it was on the lookout for another accused, Vijay Kumar. Vijay is believed to have played a crucial role in transferring the calls of Amar and also acted as a “middleman”.

Anurag’s counsel moved a bail application before additional chief magistrate Kanwaljeet Arora, saying his custody was no longer required as his interrogation was over. The court rejected the plea and upheld the prosecution’s contention that the investigation was at a preliminary stage and reports were awaited.

The court sent the accused to judicial custody till January 20. It also extended the judicial remand of Bhupendra and another accused, Kuldeep, to January 20.

Refuting the police’s claim, Anurag’s counsel said Bhupendra approached his client with the tapped conversation to sell to Amar’s political opponents. Therefore, it would not come under the purview of Section 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1882, under which he has been charged. He said a person is guilty of violating the act only if he is caught preventing, obstructing or intercepting to acquaint himself with the contents of a message.