2020 (1) TMI 1460 - HC - Money Laundering

Seeking an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR (First Information Report) and investigate the matter - Seeking for initiating departmental proceedings against the respondents - seeking direction to conduct audit of the accounts maintained by the State Resource Center - HELD THAT - It requires serious notice that the petitioner alleges large scale bungling and siphoning of public funds which may run into hundreds of crores or even more than thousand crores. The report along with submission memo of the respondent/State partially admits of certain financial irregularities however no serious attempt has been made to unearth and find out as to who has siphoned the amount. Only some notices for departmental action have been issued without registering any offence for misuse of public funds of such enormous proportion. Public office cannot be a place for acquiring personal gain. Probity in public life is of great importance. Corruption is an enemy of nation and tracking down corrupt public servant howsoever high he may be and punishing such person is a necessary mandate under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and the Indian Penal Code. The public officers arrayed as the respondents No.15 to 26 are high ranked officers and it seems to be the precise reason why the respondent State is reluctant to investigate the crime to find out as to whether any criminal offence has been committed or not however when startling and disturbing facts have been brought to our notice with prima facie proof this Court cannot shun its constitutional duty and be a mute spectator to condone such lapses if it is eventually find out in a fair and independent investigation - The respondent officers being high ranked there is apprehension that the investigation may be influenced it is directed that the matter be investigated by the CBI in a fair and independent manner. Petition disposed off.

Issues Involved:
1. Request for CBI investigation into alleged embezzlement of public funds.
2. Initiation of departmental proceedings against certain government officials.
3. Conducting an audit of the accounts maintained by the State Resource Center (SRC).
4. Recovery of embezzled funds from the implicated respondents.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Request for CBI Investigation:
The petitioner sought a writ/order/direction for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR and investigate the alleged embezzlement of public funds involving the State Resource Center (SRC) and the Physical Referral Rehabilitation Centre (PRRC). The petition highlighted that the SRC and PRRC were operating only on paper, with no tangible activities or recruitment processes, and that salaries were being withdrawn for non-existent employees. The petitioner claimed that the total embezzled amount exceeded ?630 crores. The court noted the seriousness of the allegations and referenced several Supreme Court judgments emphasizing the importance of fair and independent investigations in cases of public corruption. The court directed the CBI to register an FIR within a week and seize relevant records within 15 days, ensuring a fair and independent investigation.

2. Initiation of Departmental Proceedings:
The petitioner also requested the initiation of departmental proceedings against respondents No.15 to 26, who were office bearers of the SRC. Although the State partially admitted to financial irregularities and issued some show cause notices, no substantial action was taken. The court observed that the reluctance to investigate high-ranking officers indicated a need for an independent investigation to ensure accountability and uphold the rule of law.

3. Conducting an Audit of SRC Accounts:
The petitioner called for an audit of the SRC's accounts, which had never been audited since its registration in 2004. The court noted that the Finance Department initiated an audit only after the filing of the writ petition, which found prima facie evidence of irregular and illegal cash withdrawals. The court emphasized the necessity of auditing the accounts to uncover the extent of the financial mismanagement.

4. Recovery of Embezzled Funds:
The petitioner sought the recovery of the embezzled funds from the implicated respondents. The court acknowledged the petitioner's contention that significant public funds had been misappropriated and directed the CBI to conduct a thorough investigation to identify and prosecute those responsible for the embezzlement. The court underscored the importance of probity in public life and the need to punish corrupt public servants to maintain the integrity of public offices.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the allegations of large-scale embezzlement of public funds required serious investigation. Given the involvement of high-ranking officers and the partial admission of financial irregularities by the State, the court directed the CBI to conduct a fair and independent investigation. The court ordered the registration of an FIR, seizure of relevant records, and completion of the investigation at the earliest. The court also highlighted that the CBI could seek further directions from the court if necessary. No order as to costs was made.

← Previous Next →