KOCHI: The CBI has filed a chargesheet before the CBI court here against an educational trust, its head and a member of AICTE panel in connection with irregularities in granting accreditation to an engineering college. The case was reopened last year after the probe had been closed in 2009. Malabar College of Engineering and Technology, Pallur, head K S Hamsa; IQRA Education and Charitable Trust, which runs the college, and Ranjit Singh a native of New Delhi, who was a member of the panel which inspected the college prior to receiving the AICTE’s nod, are the trio arraigned by the probe agency. They have been slapped with IPC Sections 120B and 420 along with the Prevention of Corruption Act Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d).
Since prosecution sanction was denied, the CBI was unable to formally press charges against Manju Singh, the former regional director of AICTE and Benny Mathew a professor of School of Engineering, CUSAT, who was a member of AICTE panel which conducted the inspection.“Once the prosecution sanction is received, we will be filing a supplementary chargesheet against both Manju Singh and Benny,” said an investigation officer. The CBI investigation revealed K S Hamsa after submitting an application seeking AICTE accreditation for the college, a three-member panel was assigned to conduct an inspection of the engineering institute in June 2009.
According to the CBI, Manju Singh had appointed another panel comprising Ranjit Singh and Benny Mathew in blatant violation of the AICTE norms which said a three-member panel should conduct the inspection The infrastructure stated in the inspection report was not available at the college. The case was probed by S S Chouhan of CBI’s Anti-Corruption Unit here.
Last month, the CBI had filed a charge sheet against Thejus Engineering College, Pazhanji, on similar charges. Manju Singh was an accused in Thejus Engineering college case. However, the CBI could not file the chargesheet against Manju Singh after prosecution sanction was denied by the ministry concerned.
In 2009, the CBI had closed the case claiming hard evidence could not be found to substantiate the allegation.However, the case was reopened last year on the ground certain aspects of the case had not been looked into earlier.