CBI holds coordination meeting with DFS, public sector banks officials
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) convened a coordination meeting with officials of the Banking Securities Fraud Investigation Zone, Department of Financial Services (DFS), MoF and Chief Vigilance Officers of Public Sector Banks here on Tuesday (June 17, 2025).
During the day-long meeting, all pending matters pertaining to ongoing investigation and prosecution of the bank fraud cases being handled by CBI were discussed and several issues were sorted out, said a release.
According to the release, the meeting was a follow up meeting after the high-level meeting held in January this year between Department of Financial Services, CBI and Public Sector Banks, in Mumbai. The agenda was to enhance the interdepartmental cooperation and expedite investigations pertaining to bank fraud cases.
During the meeting, detailed presentations were made by the CBI and Public Sector Banks officials on relevant operational issues.
Many aspects were discussed and resolved. A close coordination between the banks and CBI in terms of timely sharing of relied-upon documents was acknowledged.
Further efforts to streamline procedures and ensure proactive cooperation in matters related to obtaining approvals and sanctions under Section 17A and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act were also emphasised.
The Officers from CBI and Public Sector Banks exchanged case-specific details and discussed the way forward to expedite pending investigations.
The meeting concluded with a consensus to maintain the current momentum of cooperation between the CBI and Public Sector Banks. Emphasis was laid on continuing structured engagement and institutional collaboration to overcome procedural bottlenecks, expedite investigations, resolve pending issues, and ensure timely completion of investigations, the release stated.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
44 minutes ago
- The Print
What is CBI's case against Tata firm, Nehru Port Trust officials booked in Rs 800 cr dredging ‘scam'
Dredging of ports involves removal of marine rocks and clay from beneath the water surface to increase the depth of the navigation channel. In the case of JNPT, the process started in May 2003. The plan was to accommodate large-size cargo ships. According to the agency, alleged irregularities inflicted a loss of Rs 365.9 crore on JNPT during the first phase of dredging, which was conducted between 2010 and 2014, and Rs 438 crore in the second phase, which was said to have been conducted between 2012 and 2019. New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has booked Tata Consulting Engineers, a Tata Group company, other private firms, and some officials with Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT), a public sector undertaking, for allegedly causing losses of nearly Rs 803 crore to the Nhava Sheva Port. In its FIR, the agency attributed said losses to alleged cartelisation in contracts and inflated bills for port dredging. On Wednesday, the CBI booked Tata Consulting Engineers project director Devdutt Bose; Sunil Kumar Madabhavi, a chief manager-level officer of the JNPT; two other firms in the marine engineering field, Mumbai-based Boskalis Smit India LLP and Chennai-based Jan De Nul Dredging India; and some unidentified public servants in the case. The CBI FIR, filed Wednesday, came more than three years after the probe agency, in June 2022, opened a preliminary enquiry (PE) into the allegations of collusion between JNPT officials and some private companies, leading to inflated estimates and restricted competition aimed at extending benefits solely to the colluding companies. Moreover, the CBI said it found that suppression of reports of independent experts and abuse of positions by JNPT officials resulted in excess payment for dredging beyond the Design Dredge Level (DDL). During the inquiry, 'the criminal conspiracy between the JNPT officials and other private persons, resulting in the wrongful loss, amounting to Rs 365.90 crore for phase-I and Rs 438 crore for phase-II to JNPT due to over-dredging has surfaced,' a CBI official noted in the complaint, which formed the basis of the CBI FIR. Also Read: What court said while acquitting former coal secretary & joint secretary in Mahuagarhi coal block case CBI FIR on conflict of interest, excess payment Nearly seven years after receiving a detailed report to increase the depth of the navigational channel at the port, the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) roped in the Tata Consulting Engineer (TCE) for a final report on the dredging plan and cost estimate. The TCE and Dredging Solution, another firm, prepared the final report in December 2010, the CBI FIR has documented. The TCE was also awarded the work of the project management consultant for the first phase. So, it was responsible for preparing tender documents and supervising project execution, the CBI FIR has further stated. Moreover, the TCE recommended three alternative dredging proposals and the modalities for each. It also recommended a second phase of the exercise to cater to the expected increased traffic at the port in 2020. Then, TCE, jointly with E&Y and Howe Engineering Project (India), prepared a final report. Similar to the final report of the first phase, Howe Engineering Project (India) suggested three alternatives for dredging to accommodate 20-foot-size ships, which have a capacity of 12,500 20-foot equivalent units. TCE was also made the project management consultant for the second phase, ignoring the conflict of interest. In the complaint to the agency, leading to an FIR, a CBI official noted a 'significant delay' in the dredging work from 2010 onwards, without proper assessment of prevailing dredging requirements since the detailed project report was prepared way back in May 2003. The investigators further noted that while the first phase was in progress, JNPT management led by Sunil Kumar Madabhavi had already assigned TCE the work to write the final report for the second phase. The second phase of the project began and the payment for it made based on the TCE report in violation of the JNPT board-adopted project note, which explicitly mentioned that the two phases of dredging would be taken up separately. The CBI FIR has noted that in the first phase, the excess dredging, 14.85 million cubic metre beyond the DDL, resulted in a Rs 365.90 crore excess payment, a loss for the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust. 'JNPT officials, in connivance with the PMC (project management consultant) and contractor, have also made an excess payment of Rs.430 crores to the contractor for over dredging made in Phase-II,' the FIR has stated. According to the CBI FIR, two different software were used to conduct the survey before and after the second phase of dredging. The pre-dredging survey used one software known for accuracy and widely accepted globally. However, the post-dredging survey used software patented by one of the parties in the deal on the behest of one Devdutt Bose, the project director on behalf of TCE, the FIR has claimed. Additionally, the CBI FIR alleged that Bose, along with JNPT chief manager in the planning, projects, and development (PP&D) department Sunil Kumar Madabhavi, hatched a conspiracy to allow shadow bidding by a joint venture between Boskalis Smit India LLP and Jan De Nul Dredging India and extended undue financial favours, including payments amounting to Rs 348 crore to the companies in the second phase for work already executed in the first phase, without any such work taking place. 'The above acts of commission and omission on the part of 1) Shri Sunil Kumar Madabhavi, the then Chief Manager (PP&D), JNPT, 2) Shri Devdutt Bose, Project Director with M/s TCE, 3) M/s Tata Consulting Engineers, 4) M/s BoskalisSmit India LLP, 5) M/s Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. and 6) other unknown public servant and private persons, disclose commission of offences punishable U/s 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of IPC r/w 420 (cheating) of IPC and Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1) (d) of PC Act, 1988 (un-amended) and substantive offences thereof. Therefore, it is requested that a regular case may be registered against the above mentioned persons,' the CBI official documented. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Another closure report in 2010 CWG 'scam'. Here's what happened to the 19 FIRs filed since 2010
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Court order seeking FIR in EDC land fraud matter stayed
Panaji: The high court of Bombay at Goa stayed the order of a North Goa court directing the anti-corruption branch (ACB) of the directorate of vigilance to register a first information report (FIR) in connection with allegations of fraud related to land allotment at EDC, Patto. Initially, the trial court had directed the CBI to register the FIR but later assigned the task to the ACB. S Karpe, additional public prosecutor said that the order passed by the sessions court judge at Panaji in the criminal case did not take into consideration the consent as contemplated under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended in 2018. According to the counsel, there was no reason given by the trial court for arriving at the conclusion that the FIR needs to be registered within 24 hours in accordance with the complaint. Subsequently, an application was filed for an extension of time, which was granted by the sessions court on June 19, extending the same by 48 hours. 'Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on July 11, 2025. Notice be issued by all the available modes of service. In the meantime, the effect and operation of the order dated June 9, 2025, shall be stayed till the next date,' Justice Nivedita Mehta observed. Activists had moved the court alleging that govt property was allotted to EDC to house certain offices, but they allegedly leased and sold land without obtaining permission from the govt, causing a loss of Rs 300 crore to the state exchequer. Even if permission was obtained, they ought to have deposited 50% of the amount with the govt or the EDC, which has not been done, the activists had alleged. 'In the present case, the FIR ought to have been registered. There is nothing exceptional in the present case that warrants a delay in the registration of an FIR on the ground of a preliminary inquiry. Even if there were exceptional circumstances in the case, any preliminary inquiry could not have, under any circumstances, exceeded two days,' the sessions court Judge Irshad Agha had stated. 'In the present case, the FIR ought to have been registered and a preliminary inquiry ought to have been carried out by the investigating agency. However, there is enough material to directly register the FIR,' the judge had said.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Gramin Bank recovery agent lands in vigilance net for accepting s 50k bribe
Chandigarh: The Punjab Vigilance Bureau (VB) has arrested Jatinder Pal Piplani, a recovery agent attached to the Punjab Gramin Bank, for demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs 50,000. Disclosing the details, an official spokesperson of the state vigilance bureau said the arrest was made following a complaint lodged by a resident of Chheharta in Amritsar. He further said the complainant approached the vigilance bureau and informed them that the Punjab Gramin Bank declared his property a non-performing asset due to default in payment of a house loan. The recovery file was assigned to the accused recovery agent for the recovery of the pending loan amount. The accused threatened the complainant that he, along with a police party, would forcefully take possession of his house and demanded a bribe of Rs 2,00,000 on behalf of the bank manager for settling the case in his favour. The complainant added that the agent already took Rs 50,000 as a first instalment and was now pressurising him to pay the remaining amount of Rs 1,50,000 for the bank manager. The spokesperson further informed that after a preliminary verification of this complaint, the vigilance bureau team laid a trap during which the recovery agent was arrested red-handed while accepting Rs 50,000 as a second instalment of the bribe from the complainant in the presence of two official witnesses. In this regard, a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act has been registered against the aforementioned accused at the Vigilance Bureau police station, Amritsar Range. The accused will be produced in the competent court tomorrow, and the role of the bank manager will be verified during further investigation of this case, said the spokesperson.
