Body bags case: No pre-arrest bail to two Vedant InnoTech directors

It is alleged that VIPL supplied body bags for Covid-19 victims to the BMC at ₹6,719 apiece.

Mumbai: The sessions court on Tuesday refused to grant anticipatory bail to Satish Kalyankar (58) and Onkar Ashwinikumar Sovan (30), directors in Vedanta InnoTech Private Limited (VIPL) to whom a contract for supplying body bags at allegedly inflated rates was given by the BMC. The court has observed that there was misuse of public funds.

The directors of VIPL claimed that the body bags supplied to the BMC were the only bags that qualified for supply and were as per the guidelines of the ministry of health and family welfare. (Representative Image)

The court also rejected the anticipatory bail plea of former mayor and Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Kishori Pednekar in connection with the case as well as the pleas of Kalyankar and Sovan, observing that the allegations need to be viewed seriously.

It is alleged that VIPL supplied body bags for Covid-19 victims to the BMC at ₹6,719 apiece. The contract was awarded to VIPL even though a contract had already been awarded to M/s Care One Solutions to supply body bags at the rate of ₹2,583 per piece.

The contract given to Care One Solutions was cancelled to award a fresh contract to VIPL which was over three times ( ₹1,500 per piece) what VIPL had charged other private hospitals or government authorities during the same period, an earlier inquiry had revealed.

According to the economic offences wing, Pednekar, unknown public servants and private persons, who were entrusted with the use of BMC funds, hatched a criminal conspiracy to favour VIPL and its directors, and defrauded the BMC to the tune of ₹49,63,200.

The directors of VIPL claimed that the body bags supplied to the BMC were the only bags that qualified for supply and were as per the guidelines of the ministry of health and family welfare. They claimed that they had provided three different types of sample body bags for testing, each with a different price and quality, and the material used was impermeable, leakproof, air-sealed, double-sealed, disposable, opaque, white, U-shaped with a zip and 4/6 grip, while the body bags of Care One Solution did not meet with the requisite qualifications.

However, the court refused to accept the contentions and observed that prima facie, there were serious allegations against the applicants. It also noted that this showed the latter’s interference in the purchase of masks, body bags and other articles during the Covid-19 pandemic. The order said: “It is alleged that there was conspiracy in getting cancelled the contract for purchase of those articles passed in favour of M/s Care One Solutions and getting purchased those articles at higher rate from M/s Vedant Innotech Pvt Ltd. There is also complaint by M/s Care One Solutions addressed to Additional Municipal Commissioner (Projects) at M.C.G.M. that delivery of the material was not accepted though it was sent as per purchase order from M.C.G.M.” (sic)