SC constitutes panel to probe into misuse of funds by Nagaland govt for NRHM programmes

Express News Service

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court not too long ago constituted a panel consisting of three senior IPS officers to probe into the allegations of misuse of funds for the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) programme by the Nagaland authorities.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari additionally directed the panel to submit a report back to the competent courtroom inside six months.

“The most appropriate recourse, to which there is no serious objection from both sides also, would be to constitute another SIT comprising three senior IPS officers of IPS Cadre, preferably direct recruits, to further investigate the allegations and if any substance in such allegations is found, to submit a supplementary charge-sheet,” the courtroom mentioned in its order.

The bench additionally directed the newly constituted panel to look into all of the allegations and likewise think about the CAG Report.

Court’s order was handed in a plea which was filed by social activist Rosemary Dzuvichu towards Guahati HCs order handed in her plea in search of an impartial probe into the misuse and embezzlement of funds supplied by the centre to the state for implementing programmes below NHRM. Although the HC after perusing Technical Verification and the Inquiry Report dated seventh July 2013 and formal F.I.R dated thirtieth July 2014 felt glad with the motion taken by authorities in the direction of investigating the allegations however she nonetheless approached the SC because of being dissatisfied by HCs order.

It was alleged within the plea earlier than SC that NHRMs Engineering Division had made bulk advances in money towards numerous fictitious works however as a substitute of and kick-backs have been allegedly paid to excessive rating NRHM officers. The plea additionally mentioned, “Instead of extending helping hand to pregnant women or lactating mothers and little children at the public health centres, the funds provided by the Government of India were allegedly spent on purchasing of high and luxury vehicles.”

Denying the allegations state’s Advocate General submitted {that a} thorough probe had been carried out. He additionally added that not solely part of the allegations have been turned down by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India however even the remainder of the allegations have been additionally totally probed and a chargesheet was additionally filed after the completion of the investigation by a Special Investigation Team.

Considering the contentions, the courtroom had mentioned, “We are of the view that this Court is not the correct forum for the investigation or to reach any logical conclusion with respect to the veracity of the allegations levelled by the appellant. Similarly, the impartiality, objectivity and fairness of the investigation carried out by the SIT will be considered by the Court of competent jurisdiction in due course of time. It is inappropriate for this Court to make any expression on these issues as it might unwittingly prejudice any of the parties.”

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court not too long ago constituted a panel consisting of three senior IPS officers to probe into the allegations of misuse of funds for the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) programme by the Nagaland authorities.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari additionally directed the panel to submit a report back to the competent courtroom inside six months.

“The most appropriate recourse, to which there is no serious objection from both sides also, would be to constitute another SIT comprising three senior IPS officers of IPS Cadre, preferably direct recruits, to further investigate the allegations and if any substance in such allegations is found, to submit a supplementary charge-sheet,” the courtroom mentioned in its order.

The bench additionally directed the newly constituted panel to look into all of the allegations and likewise think about the CAG Report.

Court’s order was handed in a plea which was filed by social activist Rosemary Dzuvichu towards Guahati HCs order handed in her plea in search of an impartial probe into the misuse and embezzlement of funds supplied by the centre to the state for implementing programmes below NHRM. Although the HC after perusing Technical Verification and the Inquiry Report dated seventh July 2013 and formal F.I.R dated thirtieth July 2014 felt glad with the motion taken by authorities in the direction of investigating the allegations however she nonetheless approached the SC because of being dissatisfied by HCs order.

It was alleged within the plea earlier than SC that NHRMs Engineering Division had made bulk advances in money towards numerous fictitious works however as a substitute of and kick-backs have been allegedly paid to excessive rating NRHM officers. The plea additionally mentioned, “Instead of extending helping hand to pregnant women or lactating mothers and little children at the public health centres, the funds provided by the Government of India were allegedly spent on purchasing of high and luxury vehicles.”

Denying the allegations state’s Advocate General submitted {that a} thorough probe had been carried out. He additionally added that not solely part of the allegations have been turned down by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India however even the remainder of the allegations have been additionally totally probed and a chargesheet was additionally filed after the completion of the investigation by a Special Investigation Team.

Considering the contentions, the courtroom had mentioned, “We are of the view that this Court is not the correct forum for the investigation or to reach any logical conclusion with respect to the veracity of the allegations levelled by the appellant. Similarly, the impartiality, objectivity and fairness of the investigation carried out by the SIT will be considered by the Court of competent jurisdiction in due course of time. It is inappropriate for this Court to make any expression on these issues as it might unwittingly prejudice any of the parties.”