Purchase of electric items on highly exorbitant rates
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 29: High Court has dismissed the petition filed by Executive Engineers and others seeking quashment of FIR registered by Vigilance Organization Jammu (now Anti-Corruption Bureau) in purchase of electric items by the Power Development Department on highly exorbitant rates during the period between January 2006 and August 2006.
During the course of enquiries, the rates of few common electric items from the supply orders of M&RE Rajouri, Poonch, Kathua, STD Division-IV Kalakote and STD division-III Kathua were randomly checked and compared with the rates of the Electric Central Stores, Division Jammu/ approved rates of Purchase Committee of other districts prevalent at that time and it was found that on these purchases, a huge loss was caused to the State exchequer.
It was found that officers/officials of M&RE Rajouri and STD Division-IV Kalakote namely R K Padha (now retired), the then Executive Engineer M&RE Rajouri and B B Sen, then XEN STD Division-IV Kalakote, R L Koul, then AEE Rajouri, Maqbool Choudhary, then AEE Kalakote, Maroof Dar, then Store Officer Rajouri and T S Jamwal, the then Store Officer Kalakote; officers/officials of M&RE Poonch namely U C Manchanda (now retired), Mumtaz Hussain, then AEE Poonch and Sham Lal, then Store Officer Poonch; and officers/officials of M&RE Kathua and STD Division-III Kathua namely S C Gupta (now retired), Amlok Singh, then AEE (TO) M&RE/STD Division-III Kathua and Daljit Singh, then Store Officer M&RE/STD Division-III Kathua had purchased electric items through various supply orders to different firms without inviting NITs/Quotations on exorbitant rates.
In this way, these officers/ officials of PDD by abuse of their official position and in connivance with each other/proprietors of the supplier firms conferred undue benefit to them for their ulterior motives and caused huge loss to the State Exchequer.
After hearing Deputy AG Raman Sharma for the State, Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta observed, “it is not the case of petitioners that there is some legal bar engrafted in any law for registration of FIR and investigation thereof”.
“Lodging of FIR does not mean that offences under which it has been lodged stand proved; allegations levelled in the FIR are always subject to fair investigation. After investigation, FIR may culminate into filing of report under Section 173 CrPC or under Section 169 CrPC”, the High Court said, adding “the investigation is underway and is at threshold stage. If the material/evidence collected during investigation is scanned at this stage, it clearly emerges out that prima facie evidence for constituting offences under the PC Act is available”.
With these observations, High Court dismissed the petition.
Follow our WhatsApp channel