'Promote Entrepreneurs, Self-Employment Schemes To Tackle Fake Job Rackets': Madras HC Disposes Of PIL Registered After Sitting Judge Received Fake Job Offers

The Madras High Court on Thursday disposed of a 2017 suo moto public interest litigation (PIL) that it had initiated after a sitting judge of the High Court, Justice S. Vaidyanathan had been contacted by fake placement agencies with dubious job offers. A Bench comprising Justices N Kirubakaran and S. Vaidyanathan on Thursday also emphasised on the need to create more job opportunities and promote entrepreneurship in order to tackle such a menace of fake job rackets. "In order to overcome the growing menace of job racketing and tackle the unemployment problem, we suggest the Government both at Centre and Tamil Nadu to promote entrepreneurs and create self-employment opportunities to youth, depending upon their skills, so that the future generation of this Country can be safeguarded from falling prey to such money mongering vultures", the Court opined. The Court further opined that the concerned Government must periodically conduct awareness programmes to encourage self-employment schemes and that the government authorities must assist the youth in getting loans from Banks with substantial reductions in tax benefits. 'It is true that every unemployed youth will thrive for getting a Government job, but at the same time, it should be borne in mind that their young age should not be wasted in equipping themselves and preparation for Government jobs, instead they can create their own new businesses and job opportunities through self-employment', the Court added. In the instant case, a 25-year-old Bharathiraja, a Diploma Holder in Civil Engineering had shared the contact details of Justice Vaidyanathan and other Madras High Court Judges with certain fraudulent recruitment agencies who were routinely duping job aspirants. Bharathiraja had himself been subjected to one such fake job offer as a result of which he had decided to draw the Court's attention to the racket. However on Thursday the Court warned Bharathiraja against repeating such actions in the future but directed the police authorities to not take any action against him since he did not possess any criminal intent. "This Court wants to reiterate that Bharathiraja, who (though) was the root cause to let the cat out of the bag, had given the mobile number of a Judge and address out of despair and dejection, so as to draw the attention of the Police Officials to book the accused and he is once again warned not to adopt this type of strategy in future. Bharathiraja shall cooperate with the enquiry, investigation and trial of the case, as and when called for", the Court warned. Pursuant to an investigation by the CB-CID, it was brought to the notice of the Court that a lady named Chitra, a native of Tamil Nadu was the main culprit behind the job racket. She had disguised herself as Shivani Agarwal and Bhumi Bharti and had then proceeded to swindle a huge amount of money to the tune of Rs.9,28,850/- from unemployed youths. She had been arrested in 2017 and later released on conditional bail in 2018. The Court was also apprised that Chitra had been accompanied by co-conspirator named Prathap @ Raju, however the CB-CID were unable to establish his identity or trace such a person. As a result, no charge-sheet had been filed in the case yet, the Court was informed. Opining that proceedings against Chitra must be initiated at the earliest without waiting for the co-accused to be traced, the Court observed, "The FIR in this case was registered as early as on 20.10.2017. Even though a lady accused was nabbed, remanded to custody and subsequently, released on bail by the Court below, still the investigation moves in a snail-paced and dawdling manner, as the whereabouts of other co-accused are not traceable. Therefore, we are of the view that the Respondent Police, instead of spending time in search of other accused and keeping in abeyance a criminal case without any progress for quite a long time, shall split up the case in respect of the accused Chitra and complete all other formalities, such as filing of charge sheet before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate (within a month from today), if not already filed, cooperating for smooth conduct of the Trial in the case, etc" The Court further directed the Trial Court to proceed with the trial of the case expeditiously without adjourning the case beyond 7 working days at any point of time. Trial of the case was also ordered to be completed within 6 months from the date of filing of charge sheet. Considering the gravity of the allegations involved, the Court went on to observe that the progress of the ongoing investigation must be intimated to the Court's registrar on a periodic basis. "Progress of the investigation, trial, arrest of co-accused, etc., shall have to be intimated to the Registrar Judicial of this Court every now and then, as a serious scam of job racketing is involved in this case and a fake interview call letter has been issued in the name of a Sitting Judge of this Court. In...

'Promote Entrepreneurs, Self-Employment Schemes To Tackle Fake Job Rackets': Madras HC Disposes Of PIL Registered After Sitting Judge Received Fake Job Offers

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags