HYDERABAD: A Nampally court has acquitted two Irrigation department employees accused of submitting fake medical bills after the prosecution failed to produce the Vigilance and Enforcement report on which the case was based and could not establish who fabricated or used the alleged forged documents.
The court noted that though relevant records were stated to be available with the Irrigation department, the prosecution failed to secure and produce them during the trial. The Investigating Officer (IO) also did not seize the alleged fake rubber stamps, seals, letterheads or other material said to have been used to prepare the bills. No evidence connected such material to either accused.
The case dates back to February 2018, when Irrigation official B Shankar lodged a complaint with the Panjagutta police against senior assistant B Bansilal and office subordinate P Prabhakar. Bansilal was alleged to have claimed Rs 2.50 lakh and Prabhakar Rs 1.08 lakh from the government through fake medical reimbursement bills.
According to the prosecution, the Vigilance and Enforcement (V&E) department had conducted a discreet inquiry into the claims. Bansilal allegedly submitted fabricated essential and emergency certificates, discharge summaries and medical bills in the names of his parents, while Prabhakar was accused of submitting fabricated medical reimbursement bills.
The Telangana government ordered a Vigilance inquiry in July 2017. Subsequently, the Engineer-in-Chief (AW), Hyderabad, directed a subordinate officer to lodge a criminal case against those identified in the report, following which Shankar filed the complaint.
During the investigation, police approached Care Hospital, Banjara Hills, to verify the alleged admissions of Bansilal’s mother in December 2008 and Prabhakar’s father in February 2009.
No personal knowledge of the scam: Complainant
Hospital officials told police that the persons named in the bills had never been admitted and that the bills and discharge summaries were not found in the hospital records.
However, during the trial, Shankar deposed that he had received instructions from his superior officers to lodge the complaint and had no personal knowledge of the alleged incidents.
The court also noted that the claims dated back to 2009, the amounts were allegedly paid in 2014, but the complaint was lodged only in 2018. It found an unexplained delay of about eight years and noted that neither the complainant nor the IO produced material explaining why the allegations came to light after such a long period.
The court further noted that the prosecution witnesses were not direct witnesses to the alleged fabrication. They had no personal knowledge of who prepared the bills, forged the signatures or used the alleged duplicate rubber stamps. Their knowledge was largely based on information received from higher authorities.
The court, on September 7, held that the prosecution had failed to prove the case and acquitted both accused. During the pendency of the case, they obtained anticipatory bail and were reinstated in service before the trial concluded.
