Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Former Govt Clerk In Connection With ₹1500-Crore UP Gomti River Front Development Scam Case

Sparsh Upadhyay
29 April 2022 11:52 AM GMT
Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Former Govt Clerk In Connection With ₹1500-Crore UP Gomti River Front Development Scam Case
x

The Allahabad High Court today denied bail to a former govt Junior Assistant/Clerk in connection with an alleged Rs.1500/- crores scam pertaining to the financial irregularities committed with criminal intent in the work of "Gomti River Channelization Project" and "Gomti River Front Development" by the Irrigation Department.The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal denied bail to Rajkumar Yadav as...

The Allahabad High Court today denied bail to a former govt Junior Assistant/Clerk in connection with an alleged Rs.1500/- crores scam pertaining to the financial irregularities committed with criminal intent in the work of "Gomti River Channelization Project" and "Gomti River Front Development" by the Irrigation Department.

The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal denied bail to Rajkumar Yadav as it noted that it was prima-facie found that he was also the part and parcel of the chain of corruption having been committed causing a heavy loss to the State Exchequer.

About the Gomti River project

It may be noted the Gomit River Front Development was the 'dream' project of the Akhilesh Yadav-led Samajwadi Party Government which ruled over the state during 2012-17. The purpose of the project was to channelize the river by constructing a diaphragm wall and by landscaping and constructing intercepting drains on both the banks.

The CBI had taken over the investigation into the case in the year  2017 after the Yogi Adityanath-led BJP government in Uttar Pradesh had ordered an inquiry into the beautification project of the Gomti riverfront. 

About the instant case

The CBI lodged an FIR against the instant petitioner and others and after the investigation, a charge sheet was filed by the CBI last year, u/s 120-B read with 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of PC Act against the applicant and other co-accused persons.

It was alleged that the applicant was involved in the corruption and he had exclusive knowledge of the offence. His name has come up during the course of the investigation as he was involved in a criminal conspiracy with other co-accused persons.

Allegedly, the applicant wrote under his signature that tender documents have been sold by him to M/s Patel Engineering Limited. However, M/s Patel Engineering Limited denied having purchased the said tender documents.

M/s Patel Engineering Limited had not deposited any earnest money which further confirmed the fact that the company had not submitted the tender documents and its forged documents were used by the applicant in the criminal conspiracy with co-accused Roop Singh Yadav with an intention to pool the tender in favor of the co-accused private persons.

It was also alleged that the applicant had wrongly shown the sale of tender documents to M/s Patel Engineering Limited and had arranged the photocopy of the documents of M/s Patel Engineering Limited which was submitted for the work of Diaphragm Wall.

The CBI's counsel importantly submitted that in the present case, a tender of Rs.258.69 crore has been given to an ineligible company/person which was later on extended to Rs.333 crores.

On the other hand, the counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was the junior-most employee in the chain and had simply followed the orders of higher authorities he was only the Junior Assistant/Clerk in the Irrigation Department.

It was also contended that the applicant was not in a position to do any favor or any disfavor to any of the Contractors as he was only the Junior Assistant having no authority to do anything worthwhile.

Court's order

At the outset, the Court noted that the matter pertains to a large scam of Rs.1500/- crores and that during the relevant period, the applicant was the Junior Assistant/Clerk of the department and prima-facie, it is found that he was also the part and parcel of the chain of corruption having been committed causing a heavy loss to the State Exchequer.

Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of offence, embezzlement of a huge amount, the complicity of the accused as well as the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court refused to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected

Case title - Rajkumar Yadav v. State Thru C.B.I./ACB Lucknow [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4319 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 217

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Next Story