HC sets aside order for further probe into Saubhagya scheme
10/10/2026
JAMMU, Oct 9: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside an order directing further investigation into alleged irregularities in the implementation of the Centre's Saubhagya household electrification scheme, accepting the closure report in respect of four public servants.
Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani allowed petitions filed by Manhar Gupta and three others and set aside the August 13, 2024, order of the Special Judge Anti-Corruption, Jammu, to the extent it concerned the petitioners.
The case arose from an FIR registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Jammu, in March 2020 over alleged irregularities in the implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Sahaj Bijli Har Ghar Yojana, popularly known as the Saubhagya scheme.
The ACB had concluded its investigation by filing a closure report, stating that criminal offences could not be established against the officials, although procedural lapses had been identified and departmental action recommended.
The High Court noted that departmental verification and third-party inspections of the scheme's works had subsequently been conducted. The Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Department, through an order dated May 2, 2024, had recorded that there was no material evidence establishing wilful wrongdoing by the officials associated with the scheme.
In his judgment pronounced on October 6, Justice Wani observed that the investigating agency's findings, departmental proceedings and inspection reports had to be considered in their entirety. The court held that the circumstances warranted exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The court also took note of the fact that the Anti-Corruption Special Court in Srinagar had accepted the closure report in a similar case involving allegations relating to the scheme.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the impugned order and agreed with the closure report in FIR No. 4/2020 of the ACB Jammu, insofar as it concerned Manhar Gupta, Asgar Hussain, Tasaduq Hussain Sheikh and Umesh Parihar.
The court clarified that its order should not be construed as permission to release any amounts relating to the execution of the scheme, which would remain subject to applicable law and relevant government orders and instructions.
The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Sunil Sethi, assisted by Advocate Paras Sharma, and Advocate Radha Sharma. Additional Advocate General Raman Sharma, assisted by Advocate Saliqa Sheikh, appeared for the respondents.
Share This Story |
|
Comment On This Story |
|
|
|
|