Court rejects CBI clean chit to Darda, says probe his role

Rejecting the CBI clean chit to Darda, special judge Bharat Parashar said the MP had made “misrepresentations” at different forums to claim the coal block allotment.

The order comes on the allotments of Fatehpur coal block, Chhattishgarh, to JLD and Mahuagarhi coal block, Jharkhand, to JICPL. In the first case, an FIR was filed against JLD, Darda, his sons and unknown persons, while in the other Nagpur-based businessmen Manoj Jayaswal, Abhishek Jayaswal and Anand Jayaswal were booked.

The judge observed, “Not only the private parties prima facie committed the offence of cheating by obtaining allotment of coal blocks… on the basis of false representation…, but it is also clear that the said private parties could not have succeeded but for an act of active connivance between them and the public servants.”

The court has directed the agency to file the progress report on December 19.

It said that prima facie offence of cheating under section 420 IPC has been committed by the private parties and a criminal conspiracy (120-B IPC) was “hatch-ed” between them and the officers of the Coal ministry and the Screening  committee.

The judge said, “It has come on record that Vijay Darda wrote a number of letters to the PM seeking allotment of Fatehpur (East) coal block in favour of JLD. Vijay Darda at that time was a sitting Member of Parliament and he too had specifically claimed in his letters dated 18.06.07 and 06.08.07 addressed to the then PM that JLD was promoted, managed and controlled by Lokmat Group and Industrial Development Finance Company Ltd. Thus once again there was a clear misrepresentation by Darda on behalf of JLD to claim the allotment.”

On the role of Darda’s son Devendra, the court said that feedback form signed by him furnished wrong information as regard to JLD’s net worth.

About the government officials, the court said, “It is prima facie clear that H C Gupta, who was secretary, MoC (Ministry of Coal) and was also the chairman of Screening committee, K S Kropha, then joint secretary, MoC and member-convener beside K C Samaria, then director, CA-I, MoC, were persons responsible to take all those safeguards to protect the public interest… Their conduct clearly falls within the four corners of the offence of criminal misconduct.”

It also questioned the “casual” functioning of the ministry officials and the Screening committee, and said the process of allocation was a “sham affair.”

In JICPL case, it court said the  ministry officers “suitably” amended the suggestions of the panel by changing the location of end use project from West Bengal to Bihar.