Case Law Details
Anticipatory bail rejected on possible embezzlement, HC strictly noted misuse of tax payer’s money & requested to eradication of corruption
Brief of the Case
Mumbai High Court held In the case of Pralhad @ Pratap s/o Tanbaji Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra that there has been a report also in the recent point of time that there are some more Corporations of the State of Maharashtra who have indulged into huge misappropriation of the taxpayers’ money in the alike fashion. Therefore, this Court expects the Director General of Police, MS, Mumbai and rather requests him to take up such cases and find out the veracity of such a claim made in newspapers, and if there is substance, to immediately proceed to take action in all such cases as the taxpayers are in deep anguish. Let the Government as well as mandarins in the corridors of power understand the excruciating pain and anguish of the tax payers, who have been suffering for over two decades in the State of Maharashtra. There is a onerous responsibility on those who govern to prove to the taxpayers that eradication of corruption would not prove for them a “forlorn hope”. Based on above, in the case in hand, the possible embezzlement of a huge sum of Rs. 24 crores from the office of the applicant, it will be wholly improper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence application rejected.
Facts of the Case
The State Government established ‘Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe Vikas Mahamandal’ for upliftment of “Matang” community, which falls in Scheduled Caste in the State of Maharashtra. The chairman of this corporation who was a political appointee, in connivance with the managing director of the Mahamandal and with the help of bank officer of Bank of Maharashtra withdrew crores of rupees by showing fake expenditure, disbursement of loan of subsidy, grant etc. and misappropriated the same for personal benefits. As per the reply submitted by the state, the total amount under misappropriation and embezzlement is approx. Rs. 385 crores.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Great judgment but who regards or mind the ruling of the court is a question for debate.
Simple and basic essential control system should have prevented such huge misappropriation .Now a days government formulate and implement schemes in such a way which allows policy framers and executers to take 85% of funds for themselves. Tax payers should unite and provide check and oversight over spending their money to ensure that it goes for real benefit of deserving section of people.
Free or heavily subsidized food or other essential services should available only to people who are not in working age group (children up to 21 years, elders above 60 years, handicapped persons or other specifies persons who cannot work ). For others provide skill, In present form schemes like MNREGA food security mid day encourages mass corruption and negative attitude for work.
Real objective of the Government free or heavily subsidized Schemes such as MNREGA , Food Security etc. is not welfare of poor or public but to get 85% of such funds in corrupt channels as disclosed by late Mr. Rajiv Gandhi in 1990.
राजीव गांधी
1990
खेड़ली (अलवर)
देश के पूर्व प्रधानमंत्री और राहुल गांधी के पिता राजीव गांधी ने कहा था, ‘केंद्र सरकार जनता के लिए एक रुपया भेजती है लेकिन उसके पास सिर्फ 15 पैसे पहुंचते हैं। 85 पैसे बीच में कोई खा जाता है।’