Court closes CBI case against Satyendra Jain after no evidence of illegal gains found
Special Judge (PC Act) Dig Vinay Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts noted that the investigating agency has not found any incriminating evidence over such a long period to prove the commission of any offence, particularly under the POC (Prevention of Corruption) Act, 1988. The judge added that after having investigated the matter for about four years, CBI found no criminality or evidence of personal gain, bribery, or any criminal intent or violation of financial rules.
'When CBI could not find any evidence of criminal conspiracy, abuse of power, pecuniary gain, or wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer, and the alleged acts are at most administrative irregularities, no offence under section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act or criminal conspiracy is established,' the court said.
It added that when the investigating agency has not found any incriminating evidence over such a long period to prove the commission of any offence, particularly under the POC Act, 1988, further proceedings would serve no useful purpose.
Observing that not every decision made in an official capacity that does not strictly follow rules warrants invoking the POC Act, the court added that mere neglect of duty or improper exercise of duty alone may not constitute a violation under the POC Act.
The case pertains to an FIR lodged on the complaint of the vigilance department in May 2019, in which it was alleged that Mr Jain, the then minister of Public Works Department (PWD) in the Delhi government, had approved the hiring of a 17-member team of consultants for the department through outsourcing thereby, bypassing standard government recruitment procedures.
During over four years of investigation, the CBI found that the hiring of professionals was necessary due to urgent departmental needs and that the recruitment process was transparent and competitive.
The agency, in its closure report, stated that a transparent recruitment process was followed through a competitive method, and no payments were made beyond prescribed norms and approved limits. Emoluments were neither excessive nor irregular. Therefore, no evidence of corruption, criminal conspiracy, undue favour, or personal gain was found, and a closure report is preferred.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
7 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Supreme Court directs states to survey orphaned children denied education
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed all states to survey orphaned children who were denied education under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and K V Viswanathan further asked the Centre to consider including data of such children in the upcoming census, scheduled to be carried out in 2027. The Supreme Court was hearing a plea raising concerns for orphans in need of care and protection. The bench further directed the states to survey orphaned children who had been granted admission in schools under the provisions of the 2009 Act. The petitioner said schemes of the Centre and the state governments for protection and care of orphans were inadequate, requiring consideration. 'States to make a survey of the orphan children who have already been granted admission under the provisions of the Act as well as a survey of the children who have been denied such right to free and compulsory education under the Act and if so, for what reasons,' the top court said. The states would have to return with their respective affidavits. With the survey and data collection going on, the bench asked for simultaneous efforts to ensure deserving children got admissions in neighbourhood schools. The bench granted four weeks to the authorities to comply with the directions. It came on record that several states, including Gujarat, Delhi, Meghalaya and Sikkim, had already issued notifications to include orphaned children within the 25 per cent quota for those belonging to weaker sections and disadvantaged groups as prescribed in Section 12 (1) (c) of the law. Section 12 deals with extent of school's responsibility for free and compulsory education. The bench said other states might also consider issuing similar notification and file a related affidavit on record. It posted the matter for September 9. During the hearing, the petitioner sought directions to the Centre to consider having a data of orphans in the upcoming census. 'There must be a box with regard to orphans also,' the bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was appearing in some other matter. The bench said then the government would automatically get the data of orphan children. 'It should be. I would take it up because orphans are our responsibility,' Mehta said. When the petitioner said the Centre should be asked to file a detailed affidavit on the aspects raised in the plea, the bench said it would consider all the issues. The bench observed there were Juvenile Justice Committee in all high courts and national consultations were also being held on these issues. 'So it is not as bad as it was,' the bench said, 'positive things are also happening'. The petitioner contended that India gives a lot of support and lot of opportunities to children of weaker sections such as scholarships, reservations, jobs, loans, etc., but there was nothing for orphans. She said UNICEF estimates 25 million orphans in India. 'We as a country don't even have an official number of orphans. We are right now doing a historic caste census and in that we are not counting orphans,' the petitioner said. India's 16th Census with caste enumeration will be carried out in 2027 with the reference date of October 1, 2026 in snow-bound areas like Ladakh and of March 1, 2027 in the rest of the country. The apex court had on July 2018 agreed to examine the plea seeking reservation in educational institutions and government jobs for orphans, who have no linkage in society, on par with those belonging to the SC/ST and OBC category.s
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
37 minutes ago
- First Post
Explained: How BCCI is set to be kept out of RTI Act's ambit after latest amendment by Sports Ministry
A crucial clause in the National Sports Governance Bill would have brought a financially independent BCCI under the ambit of the RTI Act, but it is set to change. read more BCCI will not fall under the ambit of the RTI Act after an amendment to the National Sports Governance Bill. Image: AFP The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has received a major relief from the Sports Ministry, as a crucial amendment has reportedly ensured that the richest cricketing board in the world will not come under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The BCCI has been independent of the Sports Ministry all this while, but the National Sports Governance Bill, which was tabled in Lok Sabha on 23 July by Union Minister Mansukh Mandaviya, brought the Indian cricket board under the ambit of the proposed National Sports Board (NSB). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The National Sports Governance Bill seeks to provide recognition to National Sports Federations (NSFs) and regulate their functioning, promoting better governance and bringing in more transparency. The BCCI will remain an autonomous body under the National Sports Governance Bill, just like the other NSFs, but their disputes will be handled under the National Sports Tribunal. Despite being tabled on 23 July in the Lok Sabha, the National Sports Governance Bill has not come up for discussion in the House due to a prolonged stand-off between the government and the opposition over other matters. How will BCCI be kept out of RTI Act ambit? Amid the logjam in the Parliament, the BCCI has received some good news as sources say that the Sports Ministry has amended the RTI-related provision of the National Sports Governance Bill. As per the latest amendment, only the sports federations that rely on government grants and assistance will now fall under the ambit of the RTI Act. Earlier, clause 15 (2) stated that 'a recognised sports organisation shall be considered as a public authority under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 with respect to the exercise of its functions, duties and powers under this Act.' But BCCI wasn't comfortable with the situation and reportedly protested coming under the RTI Act as it does not depend on government grants. The amendment has now brought an end to their worries. 'The amended clause defines public authority as an entity that is relying on government funds or assistance. With this amendment, there is a clear definition of what is a public authority,' a well-placed source told PTI. 'If this had not been done, it would have been a grey area that could have led to the bill getting held up or being challenged in court. So anything that involves public money will come under RTI. It defines the specifics,' the source added. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'And even if a national sports body is not taking government funds, it can still be questioned if government assistance of any kind is involved in the conduct or operation of its events. Because government assistance is not merely funds, it is also about infrastructure,' he explained. The RTI Act defines a 'public authority' as any institution or body established by a law passed by Parliament or a State Legislature, including those owned, controlled, or significantly funded by the government. The amended sports bill aims to align with this definition. Once enacted, the BCCI will be required to register as a National Sports Federation (NSF), as cricket is now an Olympic sport and is set to debut in the T20 format at the 2028 Games.
New Indian Express
37 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
CBI Begins Probe into Murder of BJP Yuva Morcha Leader Uma Shankar in Puducherry
PUDUCHERRY: A six-member team from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) began its investigation into the murder of former BJP Yuva Morcha vice-president K Uma Shankar on Wednesday, who was hacked to death near Paris Mahal in Karuvadikuppam, Puducherry, on the night of April 26. The probe was handed over to CBI, following an order from the Madras High Court on July 21. The court directed CBI to take over the investigation from the Lawspet police, citing concerns over fairness and impartiality, particularly in light of allegations against two sitting legislators. The court's intervention came after the father of the deceased, VC Ezhumalai alias Kasilingam, filed a petition alleging that his son was murdered over 'Kuil Thoppu' (where Bharathiar composed his poems Kuil pattu) land dispute involving local political figures, including MLAs AKD V Arumugam and PML Kalyanasundaram, as well as individuals named Chandruji, Lenin Durai, and Vino Karthi. He further accused the Lawspet police of not naming these individuals in the FIR and expressed doubts over the integrity of the local investigation.
