No charges for decades in many cases of corruption against J&K govt employees

New Delhi: The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has hauled up the authorities for decades of delay caused by investigative agencies in filing charge sheets against government servants in corruption cases.
Data gathered from the anti-corruption court in Jammu have shown that charge sheets had not been filed in a large number of cases, some of which were more than 22 years old. This is when the outer limit to file the charge sheet in a corruption case is 90 days if the accused has been arrested.

Describing the information as “astonishing”, the HC on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of the issue, after Chief Justice Gita Mittal decided to take up the case in “public interest”.

The court asked the investigating agencies to explain as to why they were “sleeping over investigation of cases with serious allegations”.

In Jammu alone, no charge sheets have been filed in as many as 226 cases registered from 1998 to 2018. In 13 of these cases, the FIRs had been filed more than two decades ago. The court observed that similar cases were pending in other districts as well, some of which for over a decade.

The accused benefit due to non-filing of charge sheets, as they continue to remain in service for decades, get bail by default and claim post-retirement benefits, the court observed.

Issuing notices to the J&K home secretary, general administration secretary, director general of police and the director of the vigilance bureau, the court asked them to explain the reasons for not completing the investigations in old FIRs.

They have been told to share the names of the investigating officers, and information on the current status of the cases and if there were any administrative instructions to proceed against officers for not completing probes within the specified time.
The administration department secretary has been asked to inform the court of any departmental action taken against the accused government employees. It sought information also about whether employees involved in serious offences were granted promotions and other benefits, the number of accused employees still in service along with their designation and place of posting, and the benefits paid to those who retired.

The court recorded that cases wherein charge sheets had not been filed pertained to cases of “forgery, bribery, misuse of government money, fictitious withdrawals from treasury, embezzlement of government money, disbursement of loans without proper documents, allotment of works without tendering process, possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income, fabrication of fictitious bills for purchase of transformers, etc.”

The order reads: “Besides allegations of corruption, there are allegations under provisions of penal code also in most of the FIRs. Many of the accused named in the FIRs are government officials. They may be either under suspension or may be getting all benefits despite the pendency of criminal cases against them.” The court has sought information from Srinagar, which is awaited.