Jan 01, 2025 04:47 PM IST
The excessive court docket struck down FIRs, citing procedural lapses and inadequate grounds for prosecution. Nevertheless, VB claims judgment didn’t contemplate proof submitted within the chargesheet earlier than trial court docket.
The vigilance bureau (VB) will strategy the Supreme Courtroom to problem the Punjab and Haryana excessive court docket’s resolution to quash instances registered within the Punjab Small Industries and Export Company (PSIEC) and the foodgrain transportation scams. The instances contain former Congress ministers Bharat Bhushan Ashu and Sham Sunder Arora, accused of corruption and monetary irregularities.
The vigilance bureau will strategy the Supreme Courtroom (in pic) to problem the Punjab and Haryana excessive court docket’s December 20 resolution to quash instances registered within the Punjab Small Industries and Export Company (PSIEC) and foodgrain transportation scams. (HT file picture)
The excessive court docket struck down the FIRs on December 20, citing procedural lapses and inadequate grounds for prosecution. Nevertheless, the VB claims the judgment is flawed because it didn’t contemplate proof submitted within the chargesheet earlier than the trial court docket. The VB argues that the fabric proof, together with monetary trails, solid paperwork, and witness statements, factors to vital corruption and misuse of energy.
The PSIEC rip-off revolves round alleged manipulation within the allocation of commercial plots. Arora is accused of misusing his place to learn choose people, inflicting losses to the state exchequer.
The foodgrain transportation rip-off includes allegations towards Ashu for irregularities in awarding transportation tenders. The VB’s investigation uncovered alleged favouritism and kickbacks within the tendering course of.
The excessive court docket’s ruling quashing the FIRs cited inadequate prima facie proof and questioned the premise of the investigations. It raised considerations about procedural lapses and potential misuse of investigative powers. The VB, nonetheless, contends that the court docket’s findings ignored substantial proof of corruption within the chargesheets.
“How can the high court ignore that scooters and three-wheelers have been shown as trucks for taking the tender by submitting fake documents?” stated a VB official, terming it a foolproof case of corruption that was quashed with out contemplating proof.
“If there was no irregularity in the PSIEC scam, why did Arora go to bribe the VB officer. He was caught red-handed,” the official stated.
“The judgment is flawed as it did not discuss the material evidence of corruption submitted by the bureau. This sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the fight against corruption. We have decided to fight the case in the top court as we have enough evidence of irregularities in both the cases,” the official stated.
The state advocate common has been apprised of the matter and the attraction could be filed “in the next few days”, he stated.