In an open letter addressed to the Chief Minister of Bihar, Sudhakar Singh, the MP from Buxer and former Bihar agriculture minister wrote:" Samrat Chaudhary Ji, Regarding the Defamation Notice Sent by Bihar Government Officer Kundan Krishnan. You must have heard that a Bihar government employee, Kundan Krishnan, has sent me a ridiculous defamation notice demanding 5 crore rupees. However, do ask him on what basis this amount of 5 crore rupees was determined; perhaps he was planning to appear on some reality show like Big Boss or Rise and Fall, but missed the opportunity after my press conference. Since the questions I raised and the allegations I made were related to the role of a Bihar government officer and a person holding a government position, I would also like to know how much the Bihar government agrees with this notice.
He added: "Over the past twenty years, most IAS and IPS officers in the Bihar government have forgotten that they are servants of the people and that elected MLAs and MPs are representatives of the people. When a servant starts deluding himself that he is the ruler, he mistreats the public and questions the people’s representatives—which is exactly what is happening in Bihar these days. Looking at the current working style, arrogance, and excessive privileges of Bihar government officers, it seems that the day is not far when some officer, offended by criticism from a minister, will turn around and serve the minister a notice demanding an apology. It has already become routine for officers to ignore MLAs from both the ruling party and the opposition."Sudhakar Singh reminded the Chief Minister: "I clearly remember that when you yourself were the Urban Development Minister, the then Patna Municipal Commissioner, Kuldeep Narayan, behaved rudely with you, which forced the government at that time to suspend Kuldeep Narayan." It’s not that Kundan Krishnan is doing this for the first time. A year and a half ago, when I was holding a press conference about Deepak Kumar’s corruption, Kundan Krishnan himself had his subordinate DSP threaten me and my brother to face the consequences. I personally met the then Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and the Union Home Minister Amit Shah and submitted this information in writing. One can gauge how utterly unruly Kundan Krishnan is from the fact that, regarding rising crime in Bihar, he had said that when there is no farming season in Bihar, farmers get involved in crime. You were the Home Minister of Bihar at that time. After this shameful statement, the entire government, including you, was disgraced. As protests and criticism from farmers grew, Kundan Krishnan was made to issue a public apology. These numerous examples are enough to show what kind of mentality Kundan Krishnan is afflicted with. To maintain a state’s democratic and administrative system, it is essential that people’s representatives from both the ruling party and the opposition continuously review the actions and decisions taken by the executive. If this is not done, these servants of the people will start looting government funds and property and become completely unrestrained."
With reference to the Bharat Tiwari case, he wrote: "you and the Bihar government have acknowledged that there was a mistake by the police. On this basis, the concerned police personnel were suspended, an FIR was registered on the complaint of the deceased’s mother, and the government ordered a judicial inquiry. At the time when Bharat Bhushan Tiwari was murdered, Kundan Krishnan was serving as the DG of Bihar STF. The command on the day of the murder, the decision-making process, the communication between concerned officers, and the role of police headquarters are all under scrutiny. On this basis, it is natural to question Kundan Krishnan’s role. As an MP, it is my responsibility to publicly question the working style and role of officers after any incident. By sending me a defamation notice, they want to portray themselves as outside the scope of the investigation, which also indicates a violation of administrative boundaries. Since you are also a people’s representative, I hope you will understand how essential it is in a democratic system for the executive to be directed by the legislature. The Constitution is supreme. If the executive oversteps its boundaries and starts questioning the Chief Minister or sending notices, it will create a constitutional crisis in the state."
He concluded: "Finally, I would request you to direct all DMs and SPs in the state’s districts to stop holding court like kings from 20 feet away in their offices while dealing with the public. They are servants of the people; they should behave sensitively and humanely with ordinary citizens. If they do so, they will avoid becoming officers like Kundan Krishnan. Strengthening this democratic system is the responsibility of all of us, so I will continue to hold a mirror to unruly officers from time to time."
Singh has received a legal notice for defamation on behalf of Senior IPS Officer Kundan Krishnan through his advocate. This notice demands a public apology, threatens a defamation lawsuit for five crore rupees, and warns of criminal action. These threats have come because I raised questions in the public interest regarding the suspicious death of Bharat Bhushan Tiwari in Bilaoti village, Bhojpur district, and the Jamui incident.
Reacting to the legal notice, Buxer MP said, "I want to make it clear that neither my voice can be silenced by the threat of a legal notice, nor can the public's questions be evaded. I will not bow to pressure from any position, uniform, or authority. The public sent me to Parliament so that I could raise my voice for their rights, justice, and the protection of the Constitution—not to remain silent in the face of injustice. Portraying the murder of Bharat Bhushan Tiwari as merely a "police operation" and presenting the case as routine action is shameful in itself. When a person's life is lost and then the incident is dismissed as a standard police operation to evade accountability, this cannot be acceptable in any sensitive democratic system. The question is: what exactly were the circumstances in which Bharat Bhushan Tiwari lost his life? On whose orders was the action carried out? At what level was the decision made, and who bears the real responsibility for this entire sequence of events? I stand by my questions even today. My clear demand is that the accountability in this case should not be limited only to lower-level police personnel; there must also be an impartial investigation into the role of the top officials who were making decisions and leading the entire system at that time. No police constable can commit a murder without the orders of a top officer. How can any lower-level police officer carry out such a major operation entirely detached from the knowledge, instructions, and orders of police headquarters—this is a matter for serious investigation. I am raising this question because whenever a serious controversy arises in the police system, lower-level personnel are often made scapegoats, while sufficient questions are not raised about the role of the top decision-makers. In the Bharat Bhushan Tiwari case as well, I am raising the same question: an attempt is being made to evade real accountability by holding lower-level police personnel responsible. In this case, no one should be kept out of the investigation merely on the basis of their position or prestige."
Singh pointed out that at the time of Bharat Bhushan Tiwari's murder, Kundan Krishnan was serving as the Director General of Bihar STF. Therefore, an impartial investigation into the command, decision-making process, communications between relevant officials, and the role of police headquarters at that time is essential.
Buxer MP said, "As part of my political and public accountability, I will continue to raise the question of what the top-level responsibility was in this entire sequence of events. In my view, Kundan Krishnan's role must also undergo an impartial investigation. No officer can be exempt from accountability because of their position. The questions I have raised are not baseless. In this case, the involved police personnel were suspended, an FIR was registered on the complaint of the deceased's mother, and the government ordered a judicial inquiry. These developments themselves underscore the seriousness of the case and the need for an impartial investigation. When the government itself took action and deemed a judicial inquiry necessary, sending a threatening notice to a public representative raising questions about this case raises several serious questions. I have also raised questions in the public interest regarding the Jamui incident. Ensuring the safety of women and girls, holding the police accountable, and delivering justice to victims is not a private agenda of any political party—it is the fundamental responsibility of governance and administration. Raising questions on these issues is my constitutional and moral duty. I want to tell Kundan Krishnan and his advocate in clear terms that I will neither apologize nor back down from the threat of a five-crore-rupee lawsuit. The answers to my questions should come not from legal threats, but from facts, transparency, and an impartial investigation. Attempting to suppress public-interest questions with threats of defamation is not appropriate for democratic discourse."
