In what may spell trouble for the family members of former NCP Minister Chhagan Bhujbal in the coming days, the Bombay High Court on Wednesday asked the State Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) to register an FIR if a case of alleged corruption was made out against Bhjubal’s son and nephew and their firm in connection with the reconstruction of Maharashtra Sadan in Delhi at a cost of Rs100 crore.
After going through the second interim enquiry report that the ACB submitted to the High Court, a division Bench headed by Chief Justice Mohit Shah observed that there was prima facie evidence in the case.
Hearing a petition alleging the corrupt practices adopted by M/S Parvesh Construction Company Pvt ltd and its directors Pankaj and Sameer Bhujbal, son and nephew of the former PWD Minister, respectively, the HC Bench alluded to the ACB’s second interim report and told the agency: “Your report shows that money was routed into the bank accounts....What are you doing about itIJ”.
Holding that the investigating agencies need not wait for a court order to lodge an FIR if it felt there was indeed a case against the persons concerned, the Judges noted, “We make it clear that ACB and ED do not need to wait for this court’s orders to lodge an FIR in case evidence exists to show that offence is made out”.
The ACB told the High Court it required two more months to complete the investigation. “We need two more months to tie loose ends (in the investigation). later, we do not want the complaint quashed by lower court due to lack of material.... The ACB hasw made a list of 9 points which are being probed by its eight different teams, “ACB’s Counsel Ashutosh Kumbhkoni said.
The HC bench court asked the ACB to present its final report on June 18. In its directive given on December 18, 2014, the HC division bench headed by chief Justice Mohit Shah –--hearing a petition filed by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) -- had ordered the setting up of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising officials from both the ACB and ED to investigate the allegations that the Bhujbal family-run trust had received kickbacks from private contractors. The HC had asked the two agencies to file their reports within two months.
The petition had alleged that contractor had made payments to two companies, namely, Origin Infrastructure Pvt ltd and Ideen Furniture, which were controlled by Bhujbal and his relatives.
The ACB and the ED submitted their separate, sealed, preliminary reports on February 26, 2015. The ACB then filed its second sealed report on Wednesday. The HC bench pursued the reports submitted by the two agencies. The lawyers for the petitioners were not present so petitioner Anjali Damania appeared in person and pleaded that the case was pending for too long and justice would only be served if the court immediately ordered an FIR and if the investigation was taken to its logical conclusion.
Damania also brought to the attention of the HC bench that she had also filed another case with the ACB on disproportionate assets of Chaggan Bhujbal and was awaiting revert on that too.