Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The allegations made in the FIR dated 14.1.2013 in nutshell are that the preliminary enquiry revealed that during 2008-09, a programme implementation plan (PIP) was submitted to NRHM, Government of India, New Delhi, wherein it was proposed to take up a Pilot Telemedicine Project in 10 District of U.P. with the support of SGPGI, Lucknow having a proposed estimate of Rs.915.37 lacs, for which an amount of Rs.9.15 Crores was sanctioned for the year 2008-09 and funds were released to the State Health Society (SHS), NHRM in June, 2008 and March, 2009. Further allegation is that the said Telemedicine Project was originally carried out by the Director General, Medical Health (DGMH) but was arbitrarily decided by the then Principal Secretary (Health and Family Affairs) on 21.2.2009 to get the project implemented through the Director General (Medical Education), U.P. (hereinafter referred to as 'DGME) in three medical colleges of the State of U.P., for which Rs.9.15 Crore was transferred to the joint account of DGME and Finance Controller (ME). Further allegation is that DGME arbitrarily awarded the Project to M/s. National Consumer Co-operative Federation Ltd. (NCCF), Lucknow Branch without following the tender Process and without calling for any open tender, thereby violating the guidelines of the Central Government on NRHM. The NCCF got the project implemented through M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd., their Business Partner, which was formed in June, 2007 with Sri Prashant Saxena and his wife Ms. Aparna Saxena as the Director and did not have any experience in Telemedicine Project and were mainly involved in civil constructions, whereas according to the NCCF guidelines for delegation of powers, it was provided that any new line of business had to be undertaken with the approval of NCCF (HO) and the same was not followed. The further allegation is that M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd. carried out works in three medical colleges and submitted exorbitant bills to NCCF.

10. He next submitted that the CBI has alleged in the charge sheet that the main scheme of NRHM was to connect the rural hospitals, also known as First Referral Units of District Level Hospital with a super specialty institute through the tele- medicine project, but the accused persons through a criminal conspiracy changed this basic plan and implemented the tele-medicine project by connecting medical colleges with SGPGI. He submitted that the said allegation has no basis in view of the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the witnesses, namely, Dr. Hari Om Dixit who at the relevant time was General Manager Community Process NRHM in SPMU dated 1.3.2013 and 27.6.2013 very clearly indicates that the decision to connect medical colleges with SGPGI was more than a prudent decision instead of connecting FRU/CHC/BPHC to a district level hospital and then to SGPGI. He himself admits that he was present in the review meeting dated 21.2.2009 where the decision was taken. The mission director of NRHM Mr. Chanchal Tiwari was also present in the aforesaid meeting of 21.2.2009 and vide his letter dated 3.3.2009, he endorsed connection of medical colleges with SGPGI through DGME. The aforesaid decision was also fully supported by Pradeep Shukla, the then Principal Secretary, Medical Health. Dr. I.S. Srivastava, the then Director General, Medical Health was also present in the aforesaid meeting dated 21.2.2009 and he fully supported the tangible shift to connect medical colleges with SGPGI through the tele-medicine project which is reflected in the latter dated 24.2.2009 which is a relied upon document filed by the CBI. Moreover, Dr. Hari Om Dixit on 20.4.2009 himself suggested the names of medical colleges which is reflected in the statement dated 28.2.2013 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of Dr. Suniti Raj Mishra and also by the mechanism of letter dated 4.5.2009 which is relied upon by the CBI, written by DGME to Dr. Hari Om Dixit.

17. He next argued that in the letter dated 24.2.2009, M/s. Aanjaneya Business India Pvt. Ltd. had mentioned the deliberations of the discussions already held with the applicant Dr. M.C.Sharma, DGME and Training Lucknow, which shows that it was pre-decided on the part of the applicant to dishonestly get the execution of the Tele-medicine project through M/s. Aanjaneya Business India Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. The investigation has revealed that on the very same day, the aforesaid proposal with slight modification was forwarded to the applicant, the then Director General Medical Education vide letter dated 24.2.2009 purportedly issued under the signature of one P.D.Sharma, the then In-charge Branch Manager, NCCF, Lucknow. However,, P.D.Sharma denied his signature on the said proposal. Further, the signature which establishes that the signature in the proposal was a forged one. DGME further forwarded the above referred proposal to the office of Secretary, ME along with a covering letter No.1149 dated 24.2.2009. The DGME being the executive agency for the project and acting as a Head of the Department did not examine the proposal of NCCF with market prevailing rates and the feasibility of the proposal while referring the approved PIP and dishonestly with criminal intent to extend undue favour to M/s. Aanjaneya Business India Pvt. Ltd. forwarded the bogus proposal of NCCF to the Medical Education Secretariat flouting the existing NRHM Rules and Guidelines wherein only the Executive Committee of NRHM was competent to approve the funds. The applicant was already known to Prashant Saxena as he had been doing for various State funded constructions projects for DGME and similarly, Arun Kumar and Prashant Saxena were in close association as they had common business interest in another company, namely, M/s. Firestone Builders Pvt. Ltd., in which Dr. Indu Saxena wife of Arun Kumar Saxena is the Managing Director. All the State funded projects awarded to Prashant Saxena through NCCF were got executed by him through M/s. Firestone Builders, Lucknow. It was also proposed for release of the proposed funds of Rs.9 Crores in favour of DGME from the accounts of DGMH, Lucknow, so that the same could be released for the nominated agency, i.e. NCCF. He submitted that after thorough investigation, CBI has submitted charge sheet against the applicant and co-accused persons who are facing trial.

12. In the light of aforementioned observations, no substantiating prima facie case was made out against the petitioner, at least no prima facie case that about the grave suspicion of her involvement was made out. The trial court could not have proceeded to charge the petitioner as it did, on the available materials, and the allegations levelled in the charge sheet. Its order therefore, cannot be sustained."

21. Learned counsel for the CBI has vehemently rebutted the arguments of learned counsel with respect to the applicant-Smt. Aparna Saxena and has submitted that during the course of investigation, it has been established that M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd. is the beneficiary Company through its Director Prashant Saxena, Smt. Aparna Saxena and the Company through its Directors was found involved in criminal conspiracy, cheating, use of forged documents in order to get undue work of tele-medicine project wherein huge number of electronic equipments were purchased and installed at exorbitant prices causing huge financial loss to the Government Exchequer, as such involvement of the applicant is also established and there are sufficient evidence both oral and documentary on record to prove that the selection of M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd.was pre-decided by virtue of criminal conspiracy and DGME being the Head of the Department and member of Executive Committee of NRHM instead of getting the proposal approved in NRHM or going for open tender for purchase and installation of equipments straight away gave the work dishonestly in the name of NCCF and even NCCF awarded the project to M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd. on the basis of forged and bogus quotation process and the motive behind this was conspiracy to earn undue profit margin by way of installing equipment at exorbitant prices avoiding all the financial guidelines and procurement rules. Hence, the accused persons including the applicant conspired with each other and caused huge financial loss to the Government. He further submitted that the investigation revealed that the applicant Smt. Aparna Saxena, wife of Prashant Saxena and one of the Directors of M/s. Aanjaneya Business (India) Pvt. Ltd., who signed the main MoU dated 28.10.2009 with NCCF on behalf of the Company and also signed a cheque of Rs.10 lacs towards advance payment to sub contract the work of M/s. CSPL is also the beneficiary of the wrongful gain, hence, submitted that the trial court has rightly framed charges against the applicant and her trial is also warranted.