Investigation Officer submits progress report to HC
SHILLONG: The progress report of the Investigation Officer Inspector N. Thohrem, who probed the criminal aspect of the education scam, did not mention any actual progress of the probe other than citing official correspondences between police officials, officials of home department and advocates among others as per the report submitted to the High Court on Friday.
While the case came up for hearing in the High Court, after the Investigation Officer submitted the progress report, Justice SR Sen fixed the matter for hearing after one week.
As per the copy of the progress report made available to the media by the petitioner, there was not much progress made by the Investigation Officer two years after the lower court had asked the police to get the required documents from the CBI for further inquiry.
However, red tape in the form of one department writing letters to another and one official to another is the only progress made after the then Chief Judicial Magistrate K M L Nongbri passed an order on 25.9.2014 that the police should move High Court to avail the documents from the CBI as asked by the Investigation Officer to send the papers for FSL for examination.
As per the report, though the East Khasi Hills SP M Kharkrang had urged senior government advocate ND Shullai to appeal before High Court, the advocate did not find it wise to directly appeal to High Court and hence a revision application before the court of district and sessions judge was preferred against the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate and subsequently, the assistance of government public prosecutor IC Jha was sought.
The Investigation Officer sums up his progress report by saying that he had submitted a requisition letter on June 18 this year to IC Jha to furnish him the revision petition with number and date which was filed before the court of district and sessions judge and Jha on the same day replied that no revision petition has been filed.
However, the copy of the reply of Jha which is part of the annexure said that no revision petition has been filed as the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 25.9.2014 had clearly mentioned that the parties should approach the High Court, if they want any documents from the CBI.
It was on 18. 17. 2011 that the first FIR related to the scam was filed by one Sharaidalyne Wahlang stating that she had applied for the post of assistant LP school teacher in the office of DI Shillong in 2009 and the result was declared on 23.12.2009, and her name was not there in the result sheet, but after checking the mark sheets, it was found that her marks were crossed.
The case was registered at Laitumkhrah police station and initially Sub Inspector LD Sangma was entrusted to carry out investigation. The Investigation Officer (IO) had also examined JD Sangma the then Director of Elementary and Mass Education and recorded his statement. The IO had also examined three members of the selection board of Shillong Centre, but the documents were not provided since they were seized by the CBI as part of its investigation.
Considering the sensitivity of the matter, the case was later entrusted to senior police officer Inspector N. Thohrem who is the officer in charge of Laitumkhrah police station.
Later on December 7, 2012, Angela Rangad and Agnes Kharshhing jointly filed another FIR against the then Education Minister Ampareen Lyngdoh based on the CBI inquiry report regarding the education scam, but it was forwarded to East Khasi Hills SP, and subsequently the letter was sent to DIG eastern range to examine the possibility of a CID probe.
Meanwhile Thohrem had examined the then Director, Elementary and Mass Education, two office assistants and one peon besides summoning other officials for recording their statements. He had also sought the permission from the court of the chief judicial magistrate to treat the FIR of Rangad and Kharshiing as supplementary.
Thohrem said that the present status of the investigation is that the statements of Director, Directorate of Elementary and Mass Education, Deputy Director Elementary and Mass Education, four selection board members of Shillong Centre and the complainant were recorded under section 161 CrPC by him and under 164 CrPC by the court.
Police also followed up the issue of transferring the case to CID and a request in this regard was made to the Director General of Police for obtaining permission for the CID probe.
Later, the Assistant Inspector General (Establishment) took up the matter with the Secretary, Home police department.
After a series of letters from the senior police officials to home (police) department, the political department on December 20, 2012, wrote to the police headquarters that since the matter is in the court, the court should be approached for a review of the direction as “the government cannot re-interpret much less modify the order of the court”.