E-Paper
Chandigarh: Sport dept clerk booked for ₹8-L embezzlement
During the scrutiny of the department’s cash book, it was found that between November 2024 and April 2025, receipts worth ₹8,23,717 were collected but only ₹4,32,700 was deposited in the central treasury
A clerk at the UT’s sports department was accused of misappropriating ₹8,23,717, forging official records, and even diverting government payments into his personal bank account.
The accused has been identified as Vakul Rana, resident of Sector 47-D, currently posted with the accounts branch of the sports department. Rana was entrusted with handling payments related to electricity and water charges along with receipts of booking charges and membership fees.
During the scrutiny of the department’s cash book, it was found that between November 2024 and April 2025, receipts worth ₹8,23,717 were collected but only ₹4,32,700 was deposited in the central treasury. This left a shortfall of ₹3,91,017, which Rana later deposited in installments after repeated reminders – ₹3,20,000 on July 18, ₹17,000 on July 24, and ₹54,017 on August 18 – raising suspicion of criminal breach of trust and deliberate misappropriation.
Forged bills and fraudulent credits
Further probe revealed that several electricity and water bill payments were fraudulently credited into Rana’s personal bank account. Records showed that at least 10 fake bills ranging between ₹74,160 and ₹1,24,785 each were processed between May and August 2025, amounting to over ₹9.7 lakh. The forged bills carried fabricated signatures and no corresponding entries in the bill registers. Crucially, the original records were missing from official files, suggesting deliberate tampering.
When confronted, Rana initially claimed he had obtained approvals, but verification showed no sanctions were ever granted by the supervisory staff. Upon being pressed further, he admitted to the discrepancies but fled the office premises, allegedly pushing aside security personnel who tried to stop him.
Chandigarh police have registered a case under sections 316(5), 318(4), 338, 340(2) of the BNS against him.
