Corruption Allegations Against AAP Leader Satyendar Jain in Delhi CCTV Project

The Delhi government's anti-corruption branch has registered a case against AAP leader Satyendar Jain for alleged corruption in a Rs 571 crore CCTV project. A bribe of Rs 7 crore was reportedly arranged to waive off penalties. Investigations continue as authorities gather evidence for legal proceedings.

The anti-corruption branch of the Delhi government has lodged a case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former MLA Satyendar Jain over alleged corruption linked to a Rs 571 crore CCTV project for the capital. Madhur Verma, Joint Commissioner of Police and Head of the ACB, stated that liquidated damages amounting to Rs 16 crore were allegedly waived after a bribe of Rs 7 crore was paid.

An FIR was filed against former Public Works Department Minister Jain under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, backed by prior approval from the competent authority. The ACB alleges that Rs 7 crore was funneled to Jain to negate the Rs 16 crore penalty linked to delays in the CCTV installation.

Bharat Electronic Limited reportedly received further orders for an additional 1.4 lakh cameras despite previous project delays. The bribe was allegedly facilitated through contractors benefiting from these additional orders. Officials claim the project was executed poorly, with multiple cameras non-functional at the handover. Payment discrepancies pointed to inflated figures to cover bribes, involving multiple vendors. An officer from BEL has confirmed the allegations and provided a detailed account. Documents from the PWD and BEL are under scrutiny to gather further evidence.

Prosecution approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was granted, enabling proceeding under Sections 7/13 (1)(a) of the POC Act and Section 120B of the IPC. A prior request from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs sought the President's consent to prosecute former Minister Jain under Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, based on evidence gathered by the Enforcement Directorate. The findings present grounds for legal action against Jain.

(With inputs from agencies.)