This case pertains to the procurement, purchase, and distribution of expensive gold and non-gold items using IRFC funds.
IRFC is a Schedule A public sector undertaking (PSU) under the Indian Railways, which primarily responsible for providing financial assistance for the acquisition of rolling stock and, more recently, the development of railway infrastructure.
A senior CBI officer stated that the agency had received a complaint from Bhaskar Roy Choudhary, Joint Director, Vigilance (Intelligence), on the Railway Board, against Banerjee and others on February 27. After conducting a preliminary inquiry, the CBI filed the FIR against Banerjee on August 28.
Choudhury had accused Banerjee and others of engaging in financial embezzlement.
“The Vigilance branch of the Railway Board scrutinised two IRFC files and identified serious irregularities in the procurement and distribution of gold and non-gold items. The complainant alleged involvement of private individuals,” the FIR stated.
The FIR also revealed that following the examination of the two IRFC files, statements were recorded, and serious irregularities were uncovered regarding the procurement, purchase, and distribution of gold coins and non-gold corporate gift items.
It was also noted in the FIR that IRFC had been requested to provide clarifications. However, despite diligent efforts, including contacting former CMD (who has since been divested of CMD powers) Banerjee, no list of recipients for both gold and non-gold corporate gift items was provided.
Additionally, IRFC officials failed to supply any Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) or established guidelines for the procurement and distribution of these expensive items.
Banerjee claimed that, to the best of his knowledge, no organisation in their ecosystem generally maintains a list of beneficiaries for mementos and gifts distributed to dignitaries.
He emphasised that IRFC follows best industry practices. However, his statement contradicted the claims made by other IRFC officials, who stated that certain items were indeed given to two Independent Directors of IRFC, excluding Functional Directors.
The FIR stated that IRFC officials appeared unwilling to reveal the list of recipients of gift items purchased using public funds.
“This lack of transparency, especially in a finance company, raises concerns about potential wrongdoing by IRFC officials, including Banerjee. The Railway Board Vigilance is unable to progress with the case due to the absence of a beneficiary list, and the extent of embezzlement remains uncertain as only two files have been examined,” the FIR stated.
–Ajit Weekly News
atk/arm
News Credits – I A N S
