BJP MLA Dr Janak Raj grilled by Vigilance in Himcare & Ayushman Bharat financial irregularities case
Old photo of Dr Janakraj
Shimla, August 20
The Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Himachal Pradesh State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (SV&ACB) on Thursday questioned BJP MLA Dr Janak Raj in connection with an ongoing inquiry into alleged irregularities in the implementation, supervision and processing of claims under the HIMCARE health insurance scheme at Indira Gandhi Medical College (IGMC), Shimla.
Dr Janak Raj, who had served as Senior Medical Superintendent at IGMC, appeared before the Vigilance headquarters in Shimla following a notice issued by the investigating agency. He was questioned for nearly three hours, from around 11.30 am to 2 pm.
According to an official press note issued by the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, the inquiry was initiated on the directions of the State Government. During the preliminary inquiry, material reportedly emerged indicating lapses and irregularities requiring examination on the part of officials and other stakeholders involved in the implementation, supervision, verification, generation and processing of HIMCARE claims at IGMC.
The inquiry has also revealed that the tendering and procurement process at IGMC was allegedly not comprehensively reviewed after 2018 and that, in several instances, higher rates were charged. The SIT is examining procurement and financial records to ascertain how such rates continued and to determine the individual responsibility, if any, of officials and other stakeholders.
During Thursday’s questioning, Dr Janak Raj was confronted with specific issues relating to the period when he was Senior Medical Superintendent and the supervisory, administrative and financial responsibilities attached to the post.
Also Read
Vigilance books Dharamshala MLA Sudhir Sharma in disproportionate assets case
The Vigilance Bureau, however, said Dr Janak Raj did not fully cooperate with the investigating team. According to the press note, his replies to several material questions were evasive, vague and lacked specific details that could be immediately verified. On issues falling within the supervisory domain of the Senior Medical Superintendent, he reportedly expressed lack of knowledge or failed to provide clear explanations.
Dr Janak Raj later alleged that the inquiry was politically motivated and demanded that the matter be investigated by a sitting High Court judge instead of the Vigilance Bureau.
The SIT inquiry is continuing, with further examination of records and the role of officials and other stakeholders involved in the alleged irregularities.
About the Author
