CBI today filed a chargesheet in a designated court here against six accused, including a former top official of Ordnance Factory at Medak, in a case relating to alleged corruption in the deal between a Kerala-based company and various ordnance factories for supplying components for battle tanks in 2012.
Former General Manager of Medak Ordnance Factory V K Panda and S Shahnavas and A Valsan, former Managing Director and deputy General manager respectively of Thrissur-based Steel and Industrial Forgings Ltd (FISL), have been charged with conspiracy, corruption and causing loss to the exchequer.
The total loss to the state exchequer following the deal was Rs 78 lakh, the chargesheet, filed in the CBI court, said.
The other accused are T Muralidhar Bhagvath and K R Mugilan, former managing director and manager respectively of AMW-MGM Forgings, Mysore, and AMW-MGM Forgings Pvt ltd represented by former Managing Director Mukesh Aggarwal.
Subi Malli, a Mumbai-based businesswoman, who was also among the accused in the FIR, has turned approver in the case. She had given a detailed statement before Ernakulam CJM court confessing her guilt and has also stated that Panda and Valsan had helped her in getting the contract for SIFL.
Malli had received Rs 18 lakh as commission from SIFL for the deal and had given Rs eight lakh to Shahnavas and Rs three lakh to Panda, it was stated in the chargesheet. The allegation against the accused is that the SIFL officials conspired with Malli to influence the public servants of Defence establishment at Avadi and bagged some contracts at highly inflated rates and cheated the exchequer.
The case was registered after searches were conducted on Jan 15 and 16 last year at the residences and premises of the suspects in Kerala, Mumbai, Avadi and Hyderabad. SIFL is a regular supplier of road wheel arm and flange used in the manufacture of artillery tanks.
It is alleged that Malli got in touch with officials of SIFL regarding supply made to the Ordnance factory at Medak in then Andhra Pradesh in January 2012. SIFL's tender was at first rejected and the same product was retendered quoting a higher price and the company managed to secure the contract.
The deal came to light after the director board of SIFL raised objection to granting of commission.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}