No illegality in awarding Maharashtra Sadan construction contract: Court

The court held there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to show illegal means were adopted in awarding the contract. The detailed order of the court was made available on Tuesday

There was no illegality in awarding the contract for construction of Maharashtra Sadan in New Delhi in the noughties, a special court has ruled while discharging five accused including directors of a construction firm. The court on July 31 said it also found no substance in the allegation that the firm, KS Chamankar Enterprises, allegedly paid ₹13.5 crore to family members of Maharashtra minister Chhagan Bhujbal.

Representational image. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

Bhujbal was then the Public Works Department (PWD) minister and his plea for discharge in the case is pending. He has insisted there is no evidence to prosecute him.

The court held there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to show illegal means were adopted in awarding the contract. The detailed order of the court was made available on Tuesday.

The court discharged former superintending engineer Arun Deodhar, and Krishna Chamankar, Pravina Chamankar, Pranita Chamankar, Prasanna Chamankar, the directors of the firm.

“The developers M/s K. S. Chamankar Enterprises cannot be held responsible as there was neither any illegal act nor while doing legal act, illegal means were adopted, which is a basic and essential requirement of the criminal conspiracy. Whether the amount of ₹13.5 crore received by accused No. 1 (Chhagan Bhujbal) and 12 to 17 (Bhujbal’s family members and close aides) was of corruption or undue advantage or not, is a question of fact, which can be determined on the basis of the relevant materials,” said the court.

The court said the prosecution is uncertain whether the conspiracy started in 2001 or 2005. “There is no specific allegation as to on which day and stage the alleged conspiracy started. In absence of specific allegations, the details, and in absence of specific evidence to even infer such conspiracy of various officers at different level and at different places, it is difficult to hold even prima facie hatching a plan by the public servants to cause undue benefit to the developer in the project.”

According to the prosecution, the redevelopment project commenced in 1998. From 2001 onwards, a proposal of KS Chamanakar Enterprises for the redevelopment was under consideration of the various departments including the PWD.

“It is a matter of record that since 2001, the process of the project started, and it was completed in the year 2006-2007. In the period of 2001 to 2007, several officers might have changed or retired,” said the court.

The state’s Anti-Corruption Bureau, in its charge sheet filed earlier this year, alleged the PWD, which was then headed by Bhujbal, conspired to ensure the firm benefits from the project. The charge sheet cited government norms and added a contractor should not earn a profit exceeding 20% for a project. It added in this case, the firm is alleged to have earned 81.9% profit.