APMDC Suliyari coal upcoming auction 3,000 MT for PAN- India MSMEs on 17th June 2025 @2533 per MT
Registered User
New UserCoal scam: CBI furnishes preliminary enquiry files in court
25 Mar 2015
CBI today placed before a special court all relevant files pertaining to its preliminary enquiry in a coal blocks allocation scam case allegedly involving Prakash Industries Ltd and others.
"The PE file pertaining to the present case has been submitted to the Court yesterday only by the Investigating Officer. Accordingly, matter be put up for consideration on May 5," Special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar said.
The court had on March 17 directed CBI to produce all relevant files of the preliminary enquiry pertaining to the case, in which the agency had filed a closure report saying it would first go through the preliminary enquiry files before proceeding further.
CBI had earlier filed before the court a copy of the reference made by Central Vigilance Commission on the basis of which the case was lodged against Prakash Industries Ltd and others.
The court was hearing the matter in which CBI had filed a closure report saying no prosecutable evidence could be found during its investigation in the case.
CBI had lodged an FIR against Prakash Industries Ltd and others in connection with alleged irregularities in allocation of Chhattisgarh's Fatehpur coal block.
According to CBI, the Fatehpur coal block was allocated jointly to Prakash Industries Ltd and another company by the 35th Screening Committee.
The FIR was lodged against Prakash Industries Ltd, its three officials, some officials of the Ministry of Coal and others alleging that the firm had misrepresented its net worth while applying for the Fatehpur coal block.
The sections under which the FIR was lodged were 120-B (criminal conspiracy) read with 420 (cheating) of the IPC and under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The agency, in its FIR, had alleged that while the company had misrepresented facts relating to its net worth, the Screening Committee had deliberately not followed the guidelines and showed undue favour to it.