Rs 700-crore graft case: Court denies bail to ex-DGHS, another

A Delhi court has rejected the bail pleas of former DGHS Dr Vatsala Aggarwal and Dr Vinod Kumar Ranga in a Rs 700-crore medical procurement corruption case, stating their custody is needed for a fair and unhindered investigation.

Court Denies Bail, Cites Gravity of Offences

The Rouse Avenue Court on Saturday rejected the bail applications of former Director General of Health Services (DGHS) Dr Vatsala Aggarwal and Dr Vinod Kumar Ranga in an alleged Rs 700-crore corruption case involving the procurement of medical goods at higher prices, citing the gravity of the offences and the need for further investigation.

“Their continued custody is necessary in order to ensure fair and unhindered investigation as there is apprehension that they may influence the investigation,” the court said.

Both accused had sought bail on the ground that the chargesheet had been filed after completion of the investigation. However, Special Judge (ACB) Vidya Prakash dismissed their pleas, observing that the mere filing of a chargesheet does not entitle them for grant of bail.

Dr Aggarwal is the former Director General of Health Services, while Dr Ranga was in charge of the Central Procurement Agency (CPA) during the relevant period. The court rejected the bail applications after considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the alleged modus operandi and the respective roles attributed to the accused. It also noted that further investigation concerning accused Rajiv Kumar alias Rajiv Rangeela and other unknown entities, firms and companies was still underway.

“The Court is of the considered view that none of the accused persons is entitled to the concession of bail at this stage. Consequently, the bail applications are hereby dismissed and stand disposed off,” Special Judge Vidya Prakash said.

Investigation Ongoing, Witness Tampering Feared

The court observed that their continued detention was necessary in the interests of a fair and unhindered investigation, as the probe was ongoing and a supplementary chargesheet was required to be filed. Further examination of the financial trail, documentary and electronic evidence, and the roles of other connected persons and entities remained pending.

" Thus, at this stage, if the accused persons are enlarged on regular bail, there is a reasonable apprehension that, having regard to their former senior official positions and familiarity with the concerned officials and official records, they may influence or approach the material witnesses, interfere with the official records or other evidence and otherwise hamper the ongoing investigation," the court observed.

The court also opined that the said apprehension assumes greater significance as further investigation is pending and the complete material arising therefrom is yet to be placed before this Court by way of supplementary chargesheet. The court said that mere filing of the charge-sheet does not, by itself, entitle the accused persons to be enlarged on bail, while keeping in mind the nature and gravity of the offences, the specific role attributed to them, the material collected during investigation, the circumstances of the case and the possibility of interference with the administration of justice.

Prosecution Alleges Criminal Conspiracy, Cartelization

Senior Public Prosecutor (Sr. PP) Kumar Sanjay appeared for the ACB and opposed the bail pleas. He argued that the Offences committed by the accused persons fall under the category of ‘economic offences’ and thus constitute a class apart from other penal offences, they being having severe ramifications not only on society, but also on the economic well-being of the country as a whole.

Senior Public Prosecutor also submitted that there is ample evidence collected during investigation, as filed with the charge-sheet, showing that both these accused persons had connived with other co-accused persons and unknown entities/firms/ companies.

He further submitted that in pursuance to such criminal conspiracy, they not only acted against the interest of the government department, but also against the interest of the members of the society, by promoting cartelization in the bidding process, and in this regard, they violated CVC guidelines/Finance rules/ inbuilt terms and conditions, by abruptly abandoning e-procurement through the GeM portal. It was further submitted that procurements were made and concluded at exorbitant prices in all the items with a view to favouring a few selected persons/ entities/ firms/ companies. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianetnews Editorial staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)