L. ADOLPHUS Vs. SP, ACB, CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the 1st accused in R.C. No. 5(A)/2015 registered by the CBI Cochin Unit for the offences under Ss. 120B and 420 of IPC and Sec. 13(2) r/w Sec. 13(1)(d) P.C. Act and Ss. 24 and 25 of the Emigration Act. He is a Central Government Officer. Since 2010 he has been working as Protector of Emigrants (PoE). The 2nd accused is a company which has been registered under the Act to recruit employees for overseas jobs. The 3rd accused is its managing director.

(2.) In December 2014 about 1200 nurses were selected by the accused company for appointment to Kuwait Government service. Rule 22 of Emigration Rules provides that the company is entitled to collect only Rs. 19,500/ - as its service charges from each selected candidate. But it demanded about Rs. 20 lakhs from each of the candidates. Some of them paid the full amount. In its account books the company showed that the amount collected from them was only Rs. 19,500/ -. No receipt was given for the payment. Those candidates were made to sign an affidavit on a 10 rupee stamp paper stating that the amount paid was only Rs. 19,500/ -. With regard to those who could not pay the entire amount of Rs. 20 lakhs, no entry was made in the company's official registers for the part payment made by them. The amounts paid them were entered in some private electronic records which were not prescribed under the Act or Rules. From each of these candidates the company took a signed blank cheque, and an affidavit stating that they took the deficit amount as a loan from the company and they were liable to repay it. The amount illegally collected by the company was sent to foreign countries through 'hawala' channel. The petitioner was fully aware of the illegalities and irregularities committed by the accused company and other companies. He did not take any action against any of them though he had received complaints from several persons. He even destroyed some complaints received by him. In some cases he forwarded the complaints to the accused company asking it to settle the matter. The illegalities and irregularities committed by the accused company were pursuant to the conspiracy entered into by it and the petitioner. There was quid pro quo. The petitioner abused the official position with intent to help the companies which committed the illegalities. These are the allegations against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner was arrested and produced before the court concerned on 16.6.2015 and since then he has been in custody.