The Bold Voice of J&K

CBI Court rejects closure report, directs further probe

0 71

JAMMU: Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu (CBI cases) Sanjay Dhar rejected the closure report filed by CBI with the direction for further investigation.The closure report is outcome of investigation in FIR for commission of offences under sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 RPC and 5(2) read with 5(1)(d) of JK PC Act. The FIR was registered on the basis of source information against B.R Chouhan, S.R Sagar, Baldari Singh and V.S Bhagul, all State Directors, KVIC, as also against Bhushan Lal Ganjoo, Secretary, M/s Vitasta Khadi Gram Udyog Sewa Sansthan, Jammu.
As per the allegations in the FIR, from 2010 onwards the aforesaid State Directors of KVIC had entered into a criminal conspiracy with Bhushan Lal Ganjoo, in pursuance whereof they fraudulently and dishonestly caused loss of Rs. 13,75,016 to the exchequer. The FIR contains allegations that schemes relating to marketing development assistance were executed only on paper on the basis of forged and fabricated records, no raw material was purchased by the NGO, fake and fabricated bills were generated for reimbursement, bank accounts of artisans were not credited with the amount meant for them , in some cases bank accounts of artisans were not opened at all whereas in some other cases the particulars of accounts of artisans turned out to be those pertaining to account details of old age pensioners, no physical verification was conducted and MDA was released in favour of the NGO with a malafide intention.
Court after going through the closure report filed by CBI observed that in the face of facts, the million dollar question that arises for consideration is, whether it is a case of mere negligence or a case of deliberate omission on the part of the successive State Directors of KVIC Jammu. This needs to be unravelled by the investigating officer by conducting in-depth probe into the matter. It is thus clear that investigating officer has failed to investigate all the aspects of the case. The investigation that has been conducted is perfunctory and half hearted in nature.
Court further said that it is a settled law that a Magistrate/Special Court is not obliged to concur with the investigation conducted by the investigating officer, in a case where, it feels that the investigation has not been conducted fully and properly.

Leave a comment
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :