An RTI activist Jeetendra Ghadge on Friday alleged that Ajit Pawar, who is being probed in connection with the irrigation scam, was given “special treatment” by the Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) as the senior NCP leader is spared from personal appearances for investigations in the case.
City-based activist said, “The way ACB has been over-sympathetic to Ajit Pawar on the behest of his political ring masters, it proves that neither government nor agency has the intention to convict the accused in the scam,” further claiming that he was getting “special treatment” from the probe agency.
Ghadge said that he had filed a query with Mumbai Division of ACB on June 15 seeking details including whether Ajit Pawar had sought exemption from personal appearance. He also wanted to know who granted Pawar the liberty to file a written reply under which the relief was given.
The activist alleged that he received four intimations within a month informing that his queries were being transferred within three ACB divisions.
Ghadge received the first intimation on June 23 from Mumbai Division which stated that his queries pertained to Maharashtra division and hence it was being transferred, he said.
Again on June 26, Maharashtra division informed Ghadge that his query was being transferred to Thane division as the case was registered there, he added.
On July 2, Thane division returned the RTI query to Maharashtra division saying that the information did not relate to the division, and on July 9, the Maharashtra Division again returned the RTI query to Thane division stating that case was registered there.
Ghadge, who has exposed irregularities in the irrigation scams through his RTIs, said, “This kind of unprofessional behaviour from ACB is not surprising and I will continue to raise such queries unless ACB is made an autonomous agency.”
Director General of ACB, Pravin Dixit, said, “The charges against the accused were voluminous in nature, hence we compiled a set of questionnaire and gave it to him (Ajit).
“When we will get a reply, we will cross examine it, then call the accused (for interrogation) as and when the need be. There is no question of going soft on the accused. We work to satisfy the court of law,” he added.
