Early Times Report
JAMMU, July 21: Additional Sessions Judge Anti-corruption Udhampur S R Gandhi today rejected the bail application of Rakesh Kumar Pargal of Udhampur, the then Chief Supervisor FCI Godown Udhampur, former Incharge Vigilance Squad in Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs in a scam alleged to be worth Rs 260 crore. The facts of the case as reveals from the police report are that a verification conducted by this Bureau inter-alia into the allegations of misappropriation of Rs 260 crore on account of cost of wheat grains, transportation charges, labour charges drawn on the basis of fictitious and false bills, had revealed acts of omissions and commissions on the part of the officers/Officials of CA & PD Department namely Muklis Ali, the then Assistant Director, CA & PD Department Udhampur, Abdul Rashid, the then Assistant Director CA & PD Departm ent Udhampur, Joginder Singh, the then Assistant Director CA & PD Udhampur, Romesh Chander, the then Assistant Director CA & PD Udhampur, Romesh Kumar, the then Supervisor, Trikuta Flour Mill Udhampur, Sushma Gupta, the then Supervisor Trikuta Flour Mill, Udhampur, Susheel Kumar, the then Supervisor FCI Godown Udhampur, Rakesh Pargal, the then Supervisor CA & PD posted at FCI Godown Udhampur, Deepak Abrol, the then Incharge, Depot Office SRTC Udhampur, Ramesh Kumar, then Clerk in Deport Office SRTC Udhampur, Sumit Mahajan, Prop. M/S Trikuta Flour Mill Udhampur, Amit Mahajan, Prop M/S Trikuta Flour Mill Udhampur, Paramdeep Singh@Pumma, Prop M/S Vikas Transport Company and others, which constituted, prima facie, the commission of offences under Section 5(1),(c), (d) r/w 5(2) J&K PC Act Svt. 2006 and Sections 120-B,420,467,468,471 RPC. Consequently case FIR No. 01/2020 was registered on 19-02-2020 at P/S ACB, Doda for investigation. Additional Sessions Judge Anticorruption Udhampur S R Gandhi while rejecting the bail application observed that the investigating agency requires more time to unearth the conspiracy and to retrieve the missing record as well. Having regard to the stage of the investigation, it is not possible to express opinion on the merits of the case. In this case public money involved is huge and thus public interest is involved. In dealing with such cases the consequences of granting bail to an accused involved is always considered with its ultimate impact on the society. The economic offences brings imbalance in the economy of the country thereby affecting the poor public and the State. In the considered view of the court accused-applicant do not deserve to get bail when the investigation is still in progress. There is every possibility of the applicant-accused tampering with the evidence and hampering-the investigation if he is released on bail. JNF |
