TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2102
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the complainants regarding the financial irregularities and misuse of public money allocated for the State of UP under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) Programme running into several thousand crores of rupees, before the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow. On 15.11.2011, High Court directed that - "We are prima facie convinced that gross irregularities financial and administrative appear to have been committed in the execution and implementation of NRHM including the matter of award of contracts, procurement of goods, article and etc. at various levels. We, therefore, direct the Director, CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry in the matter of execution and implementation of the NRHM and utilization of funds at various levels during such implementation in the entire state of U.P and register regular case in respect of persons against whom prima facie cognizable offence is made out and proceed in accordance with law". Accordingly, CBI, New Delhi after making preliminary enquiries registered FIR No. RC-1(A)/2012-CBI/SC.II/NDLI dated 02.01.2012 in the matter of irregularities in the utilization of funds allotted to UP Small Scale Industries Corporation fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in cash during the period from 28.01.2010 to 14.09.2010. Smt. Anita Bajpai is a house wife and she failed to explain the source of the said funds. He further stated that M/s Lakhdatar Industries was owned by Mr. Lakhdatar who gave loan of Rs. 17 lakhs to Smt. Anita Bajpai wife of Abhai for purchase of flat. The amount of Rs. 17 lakhs was received through RTGS in her Bank of Baroda A/c No.21860100001220. Mr. Lakhdatar left Ghaziabad and his present address is not known to him. He paid some interest to him, but the principal amount of Rs. 17 lakhs is still outstanding. He further stated that M/s Surgicoin Medequip was a supplier under the NRHM Scheme with UPSIC, when he was its MD. Shri Rahul Sharma stated that he gave sum of Rs. 46 lakhs to Abhai Bajpai in cheque, as he required the said money in cheque. He received back the said amount from Shri Abhai Kumar Bajpai in cash. Aditya Goel stated that at the instance of Abhai Kumar Bajpai, he prepared demand draft of Rs. 30 lakhs in his favour and Shri Bajpayee promised to transfer his Flat No. 4/1, Navsheel Apartments, 56, Cantt Road, Kanpur in his favour. In this regard, no agreement was registered, but the total value agreed was Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority, without appreciating the true facts and the explanation given by the appellant. He contended that this property was purchased by the appellant after obtaining loan of Rs. 46 lakhs from Rahul Sharma through proper banking channel. Rahul Sharma gave this loan by selling his ancestral property to Chaddha group for a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs. The whole amount is already returned to Rahul Sharma. For repaying the said amount, appellant sold the said Flat to Aditya Goel and obtained sum of Rs. 30 lakhs as part payment out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 55 lacs. In support of his contention, he contended that the sale agreement with Aditya Goel is not registered, but the total value agreed for payment was Rs. 55 Lakh. He stressed that this fact is truly narrated by the appellant during his interrogation by ED and is also corroborated by the statement of Rahul Sharma. He further argued that possession of the attached property is still with Aditya Goel and he filed a suit for specific performance against the appellant, but on account of the restraint order dated 28.10.2010 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Writ Petition No. 12897/2008 sale deed could not be executed. He f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hearing rival submissions, I have given my thoughtful consideration with the same. As per allegations, as mentioned in para no. 2 above, the present appellant Abhai Kumar Bajpai, the then MD of the Corporation, along with other co-accused persons committed criminal misconduct by abusing their powers and thereby misappropriated the huge as commissions for allocating the tender to M/s Surgicoin Medequip, Ghaziabad, much higher than the prevailing market rates, and thereby, caused loss of Rs. 10 Crores by awarding tender worth of Rs. 31.59 Crores. CBI filed charge sheet against the said accused persons for commission of predicate offences under Section 409, 420 IPC and 13(2) read with 13(1)(c) & (d) of the PC Act, 1988 and substantive offences thereunder. During investigation, CBI recorded the statement of Manvendra Chaddha, the representative of M/s Surgicoin Medequip Pvt. Ltd. under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before Magistrate wherein he exposed the modus operandi as detailed in para no. 2 above. During investigation, ED also recorded the statements of many persons under Section 50 of the PMLA, 2002. The statement of Ashok Katiyar and Sushil Katiyar reflects that Babu Singh Kushwaha agree....