| Court finds prima facie corruption, conspiracy in SFC illegal appointments scam | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Mar 30: In a major development in the much-talked-about State Forest Corporation appointment scam, the Court of Additional Special Judge Anti-Corruption, Srinagar, has held that a prima facie case of corruption and criminal conspiracy is made out against former officials of the erstwhile J&K State Forest Corporation and several beneficiary accused in connection with alleged illegal appointments made in 2010.
The case arises out of FIR No. 16/2014 registered by the then Vigilance Organization Kashmir, now Anti-Corruption Bureau, Srinagar, against the accused for allegedly making appointments of Grading Attendants in violation of recruitment rules and codal formalities. The court, after hearing the prosecution and defence, observed that there is sufficient material on record to proceed against the accused for offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B RPC.
According to the prosecution case, then Managing Director of SFC Abdul Qayoom Khan and then Divisional Manager Saw Mills Shalteng allegedly engaged and later regularized several persons as Grading Attendants without any advertisement, without adopting a fair selection process, and without following the prescribed recruitment procedure. The prosecution further alleged that the appointments were made on a pick-and-choose basis and that false documents were used to show that the appointees had been subjected to work-experience and performance tests.
The court noted that the material collected during investigation prima facie indicates that official position was allegedly abused to confer undue pecuniary advantage upon the beneficiaries. It also took note of the prosecution allegation that some of the beneficiaries were related to the then Managing Director or had links with a firm run by his relatives, thereby strengthening the allegation of a well-knit conspiracy behind the appointments.
The court, however, held that no sufficient material was available to proceed against the accused under Sections 193 and 204 RPC, observing that the charge sheet did not clearly establish fabrication of false evidence for use in judicial proceedings or intentional destruction of documents to prevent their production in evidence. The accused were, accordingly, discharged of these offences.
The order further records that charges had already been framed earlier against one of the accused, while the case has now been posted for April 28, 2026 for framing of charges against the remaining accused.
(JNF) |
|
