Charges to be framed against Maliwal, three ex-members of DCW

The matter pertains to an FIR lodged against the accused by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, following a complaint by former DCW chairperson Barkha Shukla Singh

December 09, 2022 01:43 am | Updated 01:43 am IST - New Delhi

Delhi Commission for Women chairperson Swati Maliwal

Delhi Commission for Women chairperson Swati Maliwal | Photo Credit: FILE PHOTO

A special court on Thursday ordered framing of charges against Delhi Commission of Women (DCW) chairperson Swati Maliwal and other members for “prima facie” abusing their official positions to appoint workers of the Aam Aadmi (AAP) Party at different posts in the women’s rights organisation.

In his order, Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh also said former members of the commission Promila Gupta, Sarika Chaudhary and Farheen Malick will be put on trial.

The charges against the accused were framed under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), read with Section 13 (1)(d) (criminal misconduct by a public servant) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The matter pertains to an FIR lodged against the accused by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, following a complaint by former DCW chairperson and Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Barkha Shukla Singh.

The complainant had alleged that the accused, in conspiracy with each other, abused their official positions and had appointed AAP workers at different posts in the DCW, without following the due process.

The FIR maintained that a total of 90 appointments were made in the DCW between August 6, 2015 and August 1, 2016. Among these, 71 people were appointed on a contractual basis and 16 were appointed for ‘Dial 181’ distress helpline. No record qua appointment of remaining three appointees could be found, it added.

While ordering the framing of charges, the court took an account of the minutes of the meetings held by the DCW on various occasions, in which all the accused were signatories. It noted that the circumstances “prima facie” strongly indicate such a conspiracy between the accused persons.

“After all, none of the three accused besides Maliwal ever objected to or gave a dissenting note to the illegal appointments. Rather the decisions were claimed to have been arrived at unanimously in those meetings,” the judge said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.