State Public Prosecutor A. Natarajan claimed the petitions had been filed only for gaining publicity in the media. He also filed two separate counter affidavits on behalf of the DVAC pointing out that the complainant ought not to have rushed to the High Court for registration of FIRs without having moved the jurisdictional Magistrate court under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure if he was of the view that the DVAC had failed to act on the basis of his complaints.
TAMIL NADUDMK MP withdraws plea to register FIRs on alleged corruption in government tenders
Legal CorrespondentCHENNAI 19 JUNE 2020 04:36 ISTUPDATED: 19 JUNE 2020 04:09 IST
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam Member of Parliament R.S. Bharathi on Thursday withdrew petitions filed by him in the Madras High Court seeking registration of First Information Reports regarding alleged corruption in tenders called for laying fibre optic cables in all villages in the State at a cost of ₹1,950 crore and for road maintenance in Thanjavur district at a cost of ₹1,165 crore. Justice N. Sathish Kumar permitted him to withdraw the cases after he was served with copies of closure reports submitted to the government by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) which did not find any substance in the complaints.
State Public Prosecutor A. Natarajan claimed the petitions had been filed only for gaining publicity in the media.
He also filed two separate counter affidavits on behalf of the DVAC pointing out that the complainant ought not to have rushed to the High Court for registration of FIRs without having moved the jurisdictional Magistrate court under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure if he was of the view that the DVAC had failed to act on the basis of his complaints.
Advertising
Advertising
“Therefore, the petitions are not maintainable and it is a clear violation of a legal proposition laid down by this court,” the SPP said. Even on factual verification, the DVAC had found that the allegations levelled by the complainant, of the tender conditions having been tweaked to favour select bidders, were false and baseless, he added.
“The petitioner had made the allegations only on assumption and without any material evidence,” he said and pointed out that the fibre optic tenders were yet to be opened. As far as the road maintenance tenders were concerned, the petitioner had complained about tender notification issued on February 25 which was subsequently cancelled since there were no bidders, he said.
