![]() Monday, Apr 22, 2002 |
| Other States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Other States
-
New Delhi
The order was passed by a division bench of the High Court on a petition of Agarwal who had sought removal of investigating officers in the case as he alleged that they were vindictive against him, agency sources said here today. The court, however, asked the CBI counsel about the status of the investigations against Agarwal in both the cases. Besides disproportionate assets case, the CBI has registered a forgery case against him for falsely involving a businessman in a FERA case. The court was informed that the investigations were complete in both the cases. While the forgery case was pending sanction for prosecution with the revenue secretary, the disproportionate assets case was with the CBI director for his approval to go ahead with his prosecution. The court gave him a time of two months to "apply his mind'' on the evidence collected by the investigating officer, the sources said. The CBI had arrested Agarwal in November 2000 along with his brother for allegedly amassing disproportionate assets. The agency has alleged that he had invested in properties in Ghaziabad, Bahadurgarh (Haryana) and World Trade Centre in the Capital in the name of his wife and had created several trusts whose beneficiaries were his minor children. Agarwal, a 1985 batch IRS officer, is also facing charges of corruption and wrongful confinement for allegedly framing a Delhi-based jeweller Subhash Barjatiya in a 15,000 dollar FERA violation case on the basis of a fax message purportedly issued by a Swiss bank. In this case, after seven months of completion of its probe, the agency has not been able to file chargesheet against him for want of sanction by competent authority. CBI's request for sanction to prosecute Agarwal has been pending as neither the revenue department nor ED was accepting him as its cadre officer. CBI had in August last sent the file to the revenue department which passed it on to the ED for its opinion. However, the directorate declined to give any opinion stating Agarwal was not its cadre officer. The revenue department then referred the matter to the Central Vigilance Commission, but they also returned the file saying their opinion would be warranted only when there was a difference over the investigations carried out by the CBI and the sanctioning authority. Now Delhi High Court has directed the revenue secretary to inform it within two months the steps taken by him on the request for sanction to prosecute Agarwal.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|