Punjab Irrigation Scam: Vigilance Bureau Clears Former Chief Secretary Sarvesh Kaushal, 2 Other Retired IAS Officers

The Punjab Vigilance Bureau has found no concrete evidence against three retired IAS officers, including former Punjab Chief Secretary Sarvesh Kaushal, in connection with the multi-crore irrigation scam that dates back to the previous SAD-BJP government.

The other two officers cleared in the inquiry are former Special Chief Secretary KBS Sidhu and former Irrigation Secretary Kahan Singh Pannu. The Vigilance Bureau’s detailed examination concluded that the material available on record was not sufficient to establish their involvement in the alleged irregularities or bribery.

The development has come through a status report submitted by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau before the Punjab and Haryana High Court on August 10. The report followed an earlier direction from the court asking the state government to complete the inquiry within a specified period.

High Court Had Asked Government to Complete Inquiry

The latest development follows an order passed by the High Court on May 15, when the court directed the Punjab government to finish the inquiry within 15 days. The court had taken note of the fact that the investigation had remained pending for more than three years after permission was granted under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Following the court’s intervention, the Vigilance Bureau completed its scrutiny of the available material and prepared its findings. The report was subsequently sent through the appropriate government channels and was placed before the High Court as part of the status report.

The inquiry was registered as Vigilance Inquiry No. 08 dated September 29, 2022 and was conducted by the flying squad of the Punjab Vigilance Bureau. Permission to investigate the three officers had been granted in 2022 by the then Punjab Chief Secretary B K Janjua.

What Was the Irrigation Scam About?

The wider case relates to alleged irregularities in the allotment of irrigation and water-related government projects during the SAD-BJP government between 2007 and 2017. The projects involved contracts reportedly worth around ₹1,000 crore to ₹1,200 crore, with allegations that the tendering process was manipulated to favour certain contractors.

The name of contractor Gurinder Singh figured prominently in the original case. Allegations had suggested that certain government officials and political functionaries may have acted in connivance with the contractor to facilitate the award of projects.

The alleged irregularities were also examined from the perspective of possible financial losses to the state exchequer. However, the latest inquiry was specifically focused on determining whether there was sufficient evidence to establish the involvement of Kaushal, Sidhu or Pannu.  According to the Vigilance Bureau’s findings, the answer was no.

Disclosure Statement Could Not Establish Their Role

One of the important elements examined by the Vigilance Bureau was a disclosure statement allegedly made by accused contractor Gurinder Singh on December 21, 2017. The statement had emerged during the investigation of an FIR registered on August 17, 2017.

The FIR included charges under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 471, 477-A and 120-B, along with provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The Vigilance Bureau noted that the amounts allegedly referred to in the disclosure statement were never recovered. The bureau also pointed out that the disclosure statement itself was not included in the challan filed in the original FIR.

In the absence of any recovery or supporting evidence, the bureau concluded that the statement by itself could not provide a strong enough evidentiary foundation to proceed against the three retired bureaucrats.

No Witness Backed the Bribery Allegations

Another major finding of the inquiry was the absence of witness testimony supporting the allegations of bribery against Kaushal, Sidhu and Pannu. The Vigilance Bureau examined statements recorded during the investigation but could not find a witness who directly supported the allegations against the three officers.

The agency also looked for an identifiable source or trail of funds corresponding to the large amounts allegedly involved. According to its findings, no such financial link could be established.

The lack of recovery, absence of supporting witness statements and failure to identify a specific money trail were among the factors that weighed heavily in favour of the three retired IAS officers.

Hundreds of Pages of Material Examined

The Vigilance Bureau did not arrive at its conclusion without examining the case material. According to the status report, investigators went through 588 pages of investigation-related material before finalising their findings.

The inquiry looked beyond the allegations against the three retired officers and examined the functioning of the Irrigation Department as well. The roles of senior officials and members of the political executive were also considered as part of the broader scrutiny.

The department’s secretary or chief secretary, the minister concerned and personal assistants attached to two ministers were among those whose roles were examined during the inquiry.

Despite this detailed review, the bureau said it could not establish a connection between Sarvesh Kaushal, KBS Sidhu or Kahan Singh Pannu and the alleged wrongdoing.

Tender and Payment Process Also Scrutinised

The Vigilance Bureau also examined how irrigation projects were normally processed within the department. This included the administrative and technical approval of project estimates and the preparation of detailed tender or bid documents by the concerned Executive Engineer.

Investigators also looked at the approval process involving the Chief Engineer. The verification of measurement books, scrutiny of bills, pre-audit procedures and eventual release of payments to contractors were examined as part of the exercise.

The purpose was to determine whether the three retired IAS officers had played any specific role in manipulating the tendering or payment process. The inquiry report, however, did not find material that could connect them with the alleged irregularities in these procedures.

Original Case Had 16 Challans Against 32 Accused

The original FIR and subsequent investigation resulted in 16 challans, comprising nine main challans and seven supplementary challans. A total of 32 accused persons were named in those proceedings, including 26 government employees and six private individuals.

The broader case therefore involved a much larger group of accused than the three retired IAS officers who were examined in the latest vigilance inquiry. The allegations surrounding the irrigation projects included claims that tender conditions were allegedly tailored to benefit a particular contractor. Investigators had also examined whether officials and other influential individuals had facilitated the process.

The latest findings, however, do not amount to a blanket closure of every aspect of the larger irrigation scam. The Vigilance Bureau’s conclusion specifically concerns the evidence examined against Kaushal, Sidhu and Pannu.

Final Decision Still Rests With Competent Authority

The inquiry report was prepared by the Joint Director (Crime), Punjab Vigilance Bureau, and was subsequently sent to the Chief Director of the bureau. The Chief Director forwarded the report to the Secretary, Vigilance, Punjab Government, on May 27 for a final decision.

The status report was later submitted before the Punjab and Haryana High Court by Jai Inder Singh Randhawa, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, on behalf of the Chief Director.

So, while the Vigilance Bureau has found no concrete evidence linking the three retired IAS officers to the alleged irregularities, the administrative process does not end with the bureau’s findings alone. The report has been placed before the competent government authority for a final decision.

For Sarvesh Kaushal, KBS Sidhu and Kahan Singh Pannu, the findings nevertheless represent a significant development after years of scrutiny. The inquiry has specifically concluded that the available evidence did not establish their involvement in the alleged corruption or bribery linked to the irrigation contracts.

The case also highlights the importance of concrete evidence in corruption investigations. Allegations, disclosure statements and suspicion may trigger an inquiry, but without recovery, corroborating witnesses, a financial trail or documentary evidence establishing a specific role, investigators may find it difficult to sustain allegations against senior public officials.