Patna. The Vigilance Investigation Bureau’s action against those involved in bribery, accumulation of disproportionate assets or misuse of public authority is not reaching its end. In such cases, FIRs are being registered after trapping or raids, but punishment is not being meted out. Due to lack of evidence, the cases filed in the court are getting weakened. According to the statistics received from the Vigilance Department, out of 4644 cases registered since 2007, only 119 cases have been punished or fined by the court. These accused were sentenced to a maximum of ten years to a minimum of two years. An order was passed to confiscate the property of many.
insufficient evidence to prosecute
The department has accepted that in 8% of the total cases registered by the Vigilance Investigation Bureau, there is lack of sufficient evidence to prosecute the accused. Most of these cases are related to misuse of public authority. During the preliminary investigation, the people involved in the scandal are made accused, but the bureau is unable to provide sufficient evidence against them in the court, due to which the case becomes weak. This gives the accused a chance to escape.
From the case of irregularities registered against one and a half dozen principals of Magadh University, including the former vice-chancellor of the university, to irregularities by ward councilors of municipal bodies of Muzaffarpur, Sasaram and Patna, and several DDC and DRDA directors, monitoring sufficient evidence. The lack of is telling. Due to this, sooner or later, there is every possibility of getting relief from these cases.
In Bihar, in 15 years, 45 IAS-IPS and other personnel were trapped by the monitoring department, charge sheet could be done in 17 only
Public servants retiring after completing their term due to prolonged research
Many civil servants have retired after completing their term due to long drawn out investigation of surveillance cases. About three dozen accused have also died. Most of the actions are fulfilling their duties amid departmental proceedings. Due to lack of sufficient evidence in the case of private personnel, no action is possible against them.