Click the Play button to listen to article

The State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan, on Wednesday (November 11), informed the Madras High Court that the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption will register an FIR in connection with an alleged scam in connection with the procurement of books to the Periyar Arivulaga Library in Coimbatore.

The case relates to the alleged procurement of “AI-Generated” books to the public libraries in the State at high prices.

Making submissions before the bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice MD Sumathi, Sathyan submitted that a structured FIR would be registered within 4 days. He also assured the court that no person would be spared, especially in a corruption case like the one in present case.

“All I request is 4 days' time by which we'll have a structured FIR rather than omnibus directions. We'll inquire into this. No one will be spared, especially in a corruption case like this,” Sathyan submitted.

The court was also informed that on November 6, the School Education Department had issued a letter to the DVAC to conduct a detailed enquiry on the issue. He submitted that on November 7, the department had initiated a detailed enquiry and on November 9, the publisher was enquired and documents were received from the Director of the Department of Public Library. It was further submitted that on November 10, 4 witnesses, including Perumal Murugan, whose expose brought the issue to light, were examined.

The Prosecutor also informed the court that following the court's directions, the bank had been instructed to freeze 3 bank accounts. He sought 4 days' time to register a structured FIR with details.

The court accepted the request and directed the State to inform the court with respect to the particulars of the FIR.

Based on the court's direction yesterday, the Director of the Public Library Directorate appeared before the court. When the court asked for details of the persons who recommended procuring books from Agal Vilakku Pathippagam, the Director informed the court that the procurement of books follows a four-layered process. She submitted that the books are first recommended by a recommendation committee, and the list then passes through an expert committee and selection committee.

When the court expressed displeasure at no action being taken against the officials involved in the scam, the Additional Advocate General submitted that they could not act on speculations and had to go through the documents in detail before passing orders.

During the hearing, publisher and author Badri Seshadri also gave his assistance to the court. He informed the court that an amount of Rs 17 lakh was paid to Agal Vilakku Publishers, which was obscenely high. He added that any person involved in the procurement process should have been able to point out the high prices being paid to Agal Vilakku.

Seshadri also pointed out that the expert committee could not be entirely blamed for procuring books. He submitted that the committee comprised well-known and respectable persons and it was highly unlikely that they would have recommended purchase of books from Agal Vilakku. Seshadri raised a possibility that the names of the books might have been inserted in the list.

“Simply blaming the committee does not work. They're all renowned people. It's not possible for these 112 respected people to have recommended these books. It must have been inserted somewhere. It is very unfortunate incident. The entire state has been seized of the matter and yet we are not able to identify the root issue,” Seshadri said.

Seshadri also submitted that with artificial influence, it could be easily identified the exact moment when Agal Vilakku's book was introduced into the list. He also submitted that he was willing to extend his assistance to the State for unearthing the issue.

The court, after hearing the parties, has directed the Director, DPL, to give exact details of the persons who had recommended the purchase of books from Agal Vilakku and the action taken against them. The court also directed the Director to respond to the points raised by Seshadri.

The court then adjourned the hearing to Monday (November 17).

Tags: