New Delhi: Posing searching questions to CBI on its closure report, a special court today asked the agency to clarify as to what evidence "it could not collect" during probe to substantiate its findings recorded in FIR in a coal blocks allocation case against Kamal Sponge Steel and Power Ltd.
"On what basis you (CBI) proceeded from conducting the preliminary enquiry (PE) to lodging an FIR in the matter and show what evidence you could not collect during the investigation which vitiated your findings recorded earlier during the PE," Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Bharat Parashar said.
"Apart from CVC report, what else (evidence) you had gathered? What have you found that compelled you to lodge an FIR in the matter? On what basis you proceeded from conducting PE to lodging an FIR. I want to know why you did not stop on PE?," the ASJ said
The court asked the investigating officer (IO) to file all the documents related to the case before it and has fixed the matter for hearing arguments on September 15.
The judge also asked, "Show me the record of PE and don't tell me that you have combined the PE of all the cases. In that case, I have to record that you have not followed proper procedures because you cannot combine them. Every case has its individual PE."
The court made the observations while hearing arguments on a closure report filed by CBI in the FIR in which Kamal Sponge Steel and Power Ltd, its directors, Pavan Ahluwalia, Kamaljeet Ahluwalia, Prashant Ahluwalia, its senior official Amit Goyal and some unknown public servants were arrayed as accused in the FIR for allegedly misrepresenting facts, including inflated net worth, to acquire coal blocks.
However, after the probe, CBI had filed a closure report saying they have not found sufficient evidence against the firm and its directors to proceed with the case.
During the hearing today, the judge asked the IO if he has examined members of screening committee which had recommended allocation of coal blocks to the applicant firms. To this, the IO said they had examined 7-8 members of the committee.
The court noted that earlier also the IO had informed it that he had recorded statements of several witnesses but had not placed them on record as the CBI was not relying on them.
The court had earlier observed that CBI's closure report lacked any logical step through which it had come to the conclusion that there was no "element of criminality" in the acts of "omission or commission" allegedly committed by Coal Ministry officials.
The agency in its closure report has said that the acts of Coal Ministry officials in not checking the applications with regard to their eligibility and completeness was not found to be in pursuant to "criminal conspiracy".
CBI had earlier claimed that officials of the firm had furnished unaudited balance sheet and had allegedly inflated its capacity to produce sponge iron by 25 percent.
