Education scam
SHILLONG: Six months after the completion of education scam report, the CBI is yet to file charge sheet against the accused.
An official source said the city CBI office had written to the central office in New Delhi for the latter’s nod for filing charge sheet but there was no response. Later, reminders were also sent to speed up the matter.
Earlier, the High Court of Meghalaya had asked the CBI to complete the probe and submit the charge sheet.
The CBI had completed the report into the criminal aspect of the scam end of last year.
Sources said in the past, uncertainly over the appointment of CBI chief in Delhi was cited as one of reasons for the delay in getting the central nod for filing the charge sheet.
However, even after the appointment of new CBI chief, the reminders for filing charge sheet sent by the CBI office in Shillong to its headquarters in Delhi, are yet to be replied.
During the investigation, the CBI had quizzed as many as 400 persons, including the former Education Minister and Congress legislator Ampareen Lyngdoh, former director of Elementary and Mass Education JD Sangma and politicians, who had recommended several names for appointment as teachers in LP schools.
Prior to the CBI probe in 2018 into the criminal nature of the education scam, there was another probe in 2011 conducted by the same agency which, however, did not examine the criminal aspect.
The second CBI inquiry was based on the FIR against the accused as the police had delayed in completing the probe.
The direction of the High Court was to submit the charge sheet to the Sessions Court with a copy to the High Court.
Before filing the charge sheet, the CBI is expected to seek prosecution sanction from the state government as per the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Panel yet to meet
for 10 centres
Earlier in 2018, there was another probe by the CBI into anomalies in 10 other centres where tests were held for recruitment of teachers.
The CBI had submitted the report to the chief secretary and the High Court.
The court had directed a three-member committee headed by the chief secretary to examine the report for necessary action. There were only two meetings held by the committee and a new committee is yet to be constituted after the chief secretary Y. Tsering retired.
