The Madras High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking direction against the respondents to conduct enquiry regarding misappropriation of Government subsidy funds to the tune of Rs.54,40,000/- meant for welfare schemes such as Indira Awaas Yojana (IAY) Prime Minister Awass Yojanna (Gramin), Chief Minister’s Solar Powered Green Housing Scheme, Flood Relief Housing Scheme  by disbursing the same to the nonexistent houses and the persons above the poverty line and take action against the erring officials within the time frame fixed by the High Court.

The PIL has been filed by one M.L.Dhamodharan.

The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Wing, Tiruvallur has filed a status report. 

It has been stated that detailed enquiry has commenced, 42 witnesses have been examined and 44 documents are collected. The enquiry conducted so far reveals that there are irregularities in the identification of the beneficiaries and also   funds were released to the beneficiaries even without construction of houses under the Scheme. 

A report has been sent to the Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Wing to get prior approval from the Head of the Department to take action against the erring Government officials. 

Thereafter, based on the approval, FIR would be registered against all the erring Government officials.

In view of the said status report filed by the respondents, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice J. Sathya Narayana Prasad disposed of the Petition.

The bail was denied to BSP MLA Mukhtar Ansari in misappropriation of fund case by the Allahabad High Court on Monday.

The bail was denied by Justice Rahul who noted that it was hard-earned tax payer money, and nobody is authorized to have the “moral or legal guts” to misuse the amount for their own use or for any other clandestine purpose.

The single bench judge said that “Reckless distribution of “Vidhayak Nidhi” by unscrupulous MLA are causing more harm to the society and subject matter resentment among the masses”.

The applicant was represented by advocate Upendra Upadhayay while the opposite party was represented by AGA Ratnendu Kumar Singh.

The Court has instructed the State to constitute a committee under the Assembly Speaker’s leadership, comprising three senior bureaucrats to audit the Vidhayak Nidhi of individual MLAs, to see how it is used.

The court has described Ansari as a habitual offender and said it is since 1986 that Ansari has been a part of Crime business and yet  never been convicted.

The court mentioned that “The applicant deserves no introduction in the State of UP on account of his alleged ‘Robin Hood’ image in Hindi speaking States of India.”

The Court said that”It is indeed astounding and more amusing angle of the issue, that a person having more than 50+ criminal cases to his credit of various varieties, has managed his affairs in such a way that he has not received a single conviction order against him,”

The MLA is facing prosecution under many sections of IPC and is behind the bars since 2005.

Justice Chaturvedi said that without any hesitation that Mukhtar Ansari has been a prime swindling the public fund  that us been allotted to him under the Vidhayak Nidhi scheme,and doing favours to his own people.He is also alleged to have given his money to his knowns for construction of a n educational institute.

The court questioned the MLA about the embezzlement of  25lakh rupees and incase they have been utilised then their work orders and receipts.

The applicant had submitted that Ansari was a indispensable personality.

“One can easily gauge his nature and character, whether he is a popular political personality or he is a biggest nuisance to the society, who is in jail since 2005 and despite of this he is winning the elections one after the other.”

The single-judge also refused the argument of parity with the co-accused who were granted bail.

The court said that “Assessing the totality of circumstances, I do not find any good reason to release the applicant on bail and consequently, the bail application of the applicant Mokhtar Anasri is hereby turned down and rejected.

The High Court also noted that Ansari has close to 21 criminal cases against him and directed the trial court to take up the trials on the top priority

“This is a most unfortunate and ugly face of our democracy where a person on one hand facing almost two dozen Sessions Trials and on the other hand the public is electing him as their representative for six consecutive times,” the Court said.

The applicant was represented by advocate Upendra Upadhayay while the opposite party was represented by AGA Ratnendu Kumar Singh.

Social activist Teesta Setalvad suffered a setback at the Supreme Court on Friday when the top court’s bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud dismissed her plea against freezing of her bank accounts in the alleged misappropriation of funds case.

In July the top court had ordered that Setalvad and her husband will have to face trial in the case of an alleged scam related to money donated for 2002 riot victims.

In that case Setalvad had challenged the Gujarat Police’s allegation that she and her husband had “siphoned off” Rs 3.85 crore for “personal use” from the Rs 9.75 crore donations received by their NGOs for the welfare of the 2002 riot victims.

 —India Legal Bureau