Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 20: Additional Sessions Judge Anticorruption Doda Amarjeet Singh Langeh today rejected the bail application of the accused involved in fictitious bill scandal.
The Additional Sessions Judge rejected the bail pleas of Junior Engineer Tarun Gupta, Khalid Najeeb , Shafqat Hussain, Naseer Rashid, Amit Kumar, Akhter Hussain, Tanveer Ahmad Shah , Nelofar Akhter, Mansoor Hussain, Abdul Rehman, Sajad Ahmad, Abdul Majid, Rahila Parveen and Fareed Ahmad Natoo who were booked by the ACB fir drawl of payments against fictitious bills, inflated billing for material and non-existent works in Block Dali, Udhyanpur, District Doda.
According to the ACB an instant case was registered with police station Anti Corruption Bureau, Doda after conducting preliminary inquiry into allegations of drawl of payments by ACD’s, BDO’s & REW’s Doda against fictitious bills, inflated billing for material and drawl of payments against non-existent work in Block Belli Udhyanur in district Doda w.e.f 2014-2018.
As per status report filed by respondent, 1386 works under different heads were executed in aforesaid block for the period afore mentioned out of which 118 works were inspected randomly during probe and loss was detected in 29 works on account of less execution on ground, escalated entries in M Book, besides one work namely construction of path at Gowari to Road Panchayat Seel, Udhyanur was found to be non-existent.
During investigation, a loss of Rs 1875307/- (Rupees Eighteen Lac Seventy Five Thousand Three Hundred and seven only) has been found inflicted upon the state exchequer in execution of these 30 works. Further, excess payment was allegedly drawn in connection with these 30 works by the then BDO of Block Dali, Udhyanur on the basis of measurement taken and bills prepared by respective JE’s/VLW’s/GRS’s who are allegedly the petitioners.
Additional Sessions Judge Anticorruption Doda Amarjeet Singh Langeh while rejecting the pre-arrest bail application, observed that even the cursory look upon the investigation carried out thus far would throw up a disturbing pattern as to how payments were drawn in the case in question against fictitious and inflated bills. Not only this, payments were also said to have been drawn for non-existent wok in block Beli Udhyanpur in district Doda w.e.f. 2014-2018. Investigation also reveals that a loss to the tune of Rs 1875307/- (Rupees Eighteen lakh seventy five thousand three hundred and seven only) has been found to have been inflicted upon state exchequer in the process. There thus are grave and profoundly serious allegations of corruption, forgery of valuable security, forgery for purpose of cheating and using as genuine a forged document knowingly-against petitioners in addition to the charge of conspiracy.
It needs to be noted that offences alleged in case in hand against the petitioners under the Prevention of Corruption Act are non bailable in nature. Similarly, offences under sections 467 & 468 of RPC are also non bailable. In absence of any allegation of being hounded up by petitioners, grant of bail to them in anticipation of arrest, on facts-would overwhelmingly tantamount to thwarting the course of investigation, a path/choice that would be contrary to the central tenet of legislative mandate that investigation is a province which his wholly reserved for investigating agency. This is one aspect. That apart, serious allegations of corruption have to be treated with greater seriousness. It is trite that corruption not only leads to systematic economic crimes but is also a violation of human rights. In the wake of allegations against petitioners, anticipatory bail if granted to them, would not only adversely affect the ongoing investigation but shall also deprive investigating agency from further unearthing the scam in question. (JNF) |
