Latest news with #DigVinaySingh
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Why CBI closed case against former AAP Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain: No criminal activity or loss to govt
A Delhi court on Monday (August 4) accepted a closure report filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in a case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi Public Works Department (PWD) Minister Satyendar Jain relating to alleged irregularities in hiring in the Department. This was one of the first major corruption cases filed against any senior leader of the AAP. In its closure report, the CBI, after carrying out investigations for almost four years, said that it had found 'no criminal activity or wrongful loss to the government' in the case. Accepting the report, Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh of Rouse Avenue court who was hearing the case said: '…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 Prevention of Corruption Act or criminal conspiracy is established.' The case was related to alleged corruption in the hiring of a 17-member creative team for the PWD for various projects. An FIR was registered on May 29, 2019 after a complaint by the Delhi government's Directorate of Vigilance, which alleged that professionals were engaged in the PWD in violation of rules, and that payments were made from unrelated project funds. The complaint said that the outsourcing of professionals for PWD projects was 'allegedly irregular and lacked proper approvals from the relevant Finance Department'. The hiring 'bypassed standard recruitment procedures', and expenses were charged to unrelated projects, it said. The main accusation was that Jain and PWD officials had ignored standard hiring practices followed by the government, altered the scope of work, and manipulated the process to favour an agency named M/s Soni Detective & Allied Services Private Limited. After the FIR was registered, the CBI examined various aspects relating to the hiring such as the justification and need for hiring these professionals, the transparency (or lack of it) behind the recruitment process, approvals and use of project funds, whether any personal gain was involved, and whether legal and procedural norms were followed. And what did the investigation find? Following the investigation, the CBI concluded that the need to hire professionals was justified. It found that the hiring process had begun with an advertisement that attracted 1,700 applications for the jobs, and that the selections were based on merit. Those who were hired were paid between Rs 50,000 and Rs 1.95 lakh per month, which the CBI said was 'justified remuneration' that 'aligned with the regular earnings' of other PWD architects. The CBI had also stated that the hiring of professionals was necessary due to urgent departmental needs and that no payments beyond approved limits had been made. 'The total investigation found no criminal activity or wrongful loss to the government… No evidence of quid pro quo or conspiracy has emerged, and the acts of public servants do not constitute fraudulent conduct,' it said. The CBI also said that the agency was hired through a transparent tender advertised in newspapers, and no complaints of irregularities were received from the losing bidder. The CBI investigation concluded that the key reasons for requiring professionals stemmed from a note written by officers to the Minister back in September 2015, in which they had flagged the absence of in-house expertise and a large number of vacancies. Also, several key infrastructure projects such as smart schools, hospitals, clinics, and road redesigns were pending. The CBI noted that at the time the hirings took place, there were close to 50% vacancies in the posts of architects, and major infrastructure projects had to be executed in a time-bound manner by the Delhi government. The 'highly qualified candidates' who were hired managed 82 projects, including mohalla clinics, flyovers and elevated corridors, and anganwadis, the CBI said. The CBI concluded that there were no irregularities in recruitment, and no one had made any pecuniary gains. What other cases does Jain face? Jain is facing two other cases: one relating to alleged disproportionate assets, another relating to alleged corruption in a Rs 571 crore project to install CCTV cameras in Delhi. DA CASE: Jain is accused of amassing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the extent of approximately Rs 1.62 crore between February 14, 2015 and May 31, 2017 while functioning as a public servant. CCTV CASE: In March this year, the Delhi government's Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) booked Jain for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 7 crore to waive a penalty of Rs 16 crore imposed on Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) which was installing CCTVs cameras in Delhi. Both cases are being heard in Delhi's Rouse Avenue court. Charges are yet to be framed in either of the two cases.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
AAP's Satyendar Jain gets clean chit in PWD corruption case: What were the allegations against him?
Live Events What was the case about? (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel A Delhi court on Monday accepted the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) closure report in a 2019 case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain , ending a years-long probe into alleged irregularities in recruitment within the Public Works Department (PWD) during his tenure as the verdict, Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh said the investigation had not produced evidence of any criminal misconduct.'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 (Prevention of Corruption) Act, 1988, further proceedings would serve no useful purpose,' the judge further observed that 'no offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act or criminal conspiracy is established,' and that the alleged acts amounted, 'at most,' to administrative lapses. The court emphasised that there was no indication of 'criminal conspiracy, abuse of power, pecuniary gain, or wrongful loss to the government exchequer.'The CBI had filed its final report after nearly four years of investigation, concluding that there was 'no criminal activity or wrongful loss to the government' in the matter. The agency also recommended rejecting a protest petition filed against its findings, calling it unsupported by prima facie to the development, the AAP accused the BJP of misusing central agencies. Arvind Kejriwal , the party's chief and former Delhi chief minister, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that all cases filed against AAP leaders were 'false' and asked who would be held accountable for the emotional toll on their CBI registered an FIR on May 29, 2019, based on a complaint from the Directorate of Vigilance. It accused Jain, then serving as Delhi's PWD minister, of bypassing established procedures to hire a 17-member team of complaint alleged that the appointments were made without proper approval from the Finance Department and that payments were routed from unrelated project CBI inquiry focused on whether the hiring process was transparent, whether funds were misused, and whether rules were ignored to benefit specific according to the agency's closure report, the recruitment began with a public advertisement that attracted around 1,700 applications. The CBI stated that the professionals were hired on merit, and the appointments were justified given that nearly 50% of architectural posts were vacant at the time. The department was also handling large infrastructure projects requiring urgent court, citing the agency's findings, noted that 'hiring through an outsourcing agency was an accepted, common practice.' It further underlined that 'no payments were made beyond prescribed norms and approved limits,' and there was no evidence of 'quid pro quo or conspiracy.'
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Court accepts CBI's clean chit to Satyendar Jain in graft case
NEW DELHI: In a major relief for Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain, a Delhi court on Monday accepted the CBI's closure report in a 2018 corruption case related to the hiring of a creative team for the Public Works Department (PWD). Special CBI Judge Dig Vinay Singh approved the report, observing that the investigation found no evidence of criminal conduct, personal gain, bribery, or procedural violations. 'In the absence of any evidence and sanction, the present final report for closure of the FIR is accepted,' the judge noted. The case, registered in May 2018, named Jain and senior PWD officials under IPC Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The allegations centred around the appointment of a 17-member team of consultants via a third-party agency—Soni Detective & Allied Services Pvt Ltd—through alleged manipulation of tender procedures and dilution of eligibility norms. It was also alleged that payments to these consultants were routed through unrelated project expenditures without proper financial approval.
The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Court closes CBI case against Satyendra Jain after no evidence of illegal gains found
A Delhi court on Monday (August 4, 2025) allowed the closure report filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in a case related to alleged irregularities in hiring in the Public Works Department (PWD) case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain after neither corruption not criminal conspiracy was proved against him. 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.
The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Court closes graft case against Satyendar Jain after CBI finds ‘no illegal gains'
A special court on Monday accepted the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) closure report in a graft case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain in awarding a tender to a private company during his tenure as the Public Works Department Minister, noting that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe 'found no illegal gains or wrongful loss to the government', thus proving there was no conspiracy or corruption. Responding to the development, AAP said in a statement, 'All the cases filed against AAP leaders are false. With time, the truth will come out in all cases.' 'No evidence' Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh (Prevention of Corruption Act) said, 'When the CBI could not find any evidence of criminal conspiracy, abuse of power, pecuniary gain, or wrongful loss to the 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 CBI launched an investigation based on a 2019 FIR by the Delhi government's Vigilance Department stating that Mr. Jain had approved the recruitment of a 17-member team of consultants for the PWD through outsourcing, thereby bypassing standard government recruitment procedures. No benefit: agency However, in its closure report, the CBI stated that there was 'no pecuniary benefit' to the hired persons and the acts of the accused 'did not constitute fraudulent conduct'. The report stated that the consultants were hired through a 'transparent process' and were examined by a 'broad-based committee', consisting of members from the Central Public Works Department, Delhi Metro Corporation and Housing and Urban Development Corporation. 'The qualifications of the selected candidates met general standards, many from reputed institutes, and some moved on to better jobs later,' the report added. Citing the closure report, the court said that the hiring process was justified because the PWD faced a shortage of specialised employees in areas like urban planning and graphic design, where no sanctioned posts or recruitment rules existed, making direct recruitment unfeasible. 'Therefore, hiring through an outsourcing agency was an accepted, common practice,' the court noted. 'Political vendetta' Leader of the Opposition in the Delhi Assembly Atishi termed the judgment a 'proof of the BJP's political vendetta'. 'Over 200 cases have been filed against AAP leaders since 2015, but none involve corruption. Every time these cases reach court, their baseless claims are exposed. The BJP has weaponised agencies to tarnish reputations without evidence, without foundation,' she said at a press conference.
