A report analysing multiple police investigations in misappropriation of old age social security pension funds, by disbursing them to thousands of ineligible beneficiaries in Haryana, submitted by the anti-corruption bureau (ACB) in the Punjab and Haryana high court, has picked holes in the investigations, including failure of the police to invoke anti-graft law, and probably hastened the HC decision to order a CBI preliminary enquiry in the matter.
An HC bench of Justice Vinod Bhardwaj had on May 25 ordered a preliminary enquiry by the CBI into the allegations of misappropriation of social security pension fund, role and involvement of officials by conscious omissions or dereliction and failing to secure the interests of the state and public exchequer. The CBI has been directed to file a report before the HC in three months by August 24.
As per a May 20 ACB report in the form of a sworn statement submitted in the HC, 10 first information reports (FIRs) were registered by the state police in the disbursement of old age pension to ineligible beneficiaries. These included three FIRs in Karnal, two each in Mahendragarh, Jind and Kurukshetra and one in Kaithal.
‘Perpetrators not charge-sheeted’
{{/usCountry}}‘Perpetrators not charge-sheeted’
{{/usCountry}}The ACB told the court that in FIR number 112 of February 23, 2015, registered by Karnal police, neither the police collected evidence to prove that beneficiaries were ineligible at the time of grant of pension, nor the investigating officer independently collected evidence to prove that the beneficiaries were ineligible as per the laid down eligibility criteria, even on a sample basis.
The ACB said the chargesheet qua the main accused (an official) Baljeet Singh, is entirely based on the audit report and does not contain evidence to prove that the 11,904 alleged beneficiaries were ineligible. Neither cogent evidence has been collected to prove that the accused was the sole custodian of old age pension forms, nor statement of any officials of district social welfare office, Karnal was recorded in this regard.
“Despite the involvement of a public servant and middlemen and evidence proving exchange of bribe, provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act have not been invoked,” the ACB told the HC.
Pointing out lacunae in investigation of FIR number 113 registered by Karnal police, where it was alleged that of 45,722 new pensioners registered in Karnal between 2012 and 2014, the age of 4,425 applicants was found to be less than 60 and ₹1.92 crore was wrongfully paid to them, the ACB said none of the 4,425 applicants joined the investigation and none of the ineligible beneficiaries were charge-sheeted despite clear guidelines that the beneficiaries shall be liable for prosecution in case of deliberate wrong information. “No attempt has been made during the investigation to identify middlemen despite the fact that two such persons had been found involved in FIR number 112 registered at the same police station.
“Only the then district social welfare officer (DSWO) was held accountable but the role of other public servants does not appear to have been investigated,” the ACB said.
Regarding FIR number 114 registered by Karnal police where allegations of grant of ₹9.62 crore pension money to 16,487 beneficiaries on the basis of reports of only two doctors were being probed, the ACB said there were shortcomings in the investigations.
“The beneficiaries who have used forged documents regarding age are liable for prosecution but have not been prosecuted. The forensic science lab report establishing forgery of the doctor’s signature has not been received so far. Provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act ought to have been invoked since a public servant along with two middle men were found to be involved in granting undue pecuniary advantage by abuse of official position. Role of other public servants does not appear to have been investigated,” the ACB told the court.
The ACB in its affidavit said the investigating officer (IO) in FIR number 116 of May 27, 2021 registered by Jind police, in which 51 beneficiaries were found ineligible, had prepared an untraced report on the ground that the beneficiaries have returned the amount of ₹15.74 lakh drawn as pension by them despite the fact that they are liable for prosecution for allegedly giving wrong information supported with forged documents of age. The untraced report is still pending for approval of the supervisory officers before filing in the court. “The role of public servants in the grant of pension to ineligible beneficiaries has also not been looked into and despite undue pecuniary advantage having been given by the public servants to ineligible beneficiaries, the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act have not been invoked,” the ACB said.