Enforcement Directorate (ED).
| Photo Credit: PTI
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has arrested a contractor here under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on charges of being involved in the irregularities related to the Centre’s Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) implemented in Rajasthan. The accused, Padamchand Jain, allegedly gave bribes to public servants to obtain illegal protection and cover up shortcomings in the projects executed by his firm.
The ED, which had earlier made the first arrest in the case, of Piyush Jain, in February this year, said in a statement that Mr. Padamchand, proprietor of Shree Shyam Tubewell Company, was involved in securing tenders pertaining to JJM works based on purported fake and fabricated work completion certificates obtained by bribing senior officials of the State government’s Public Health Engineering Department (PHED).
The money laundering case stems from a first information report registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau of Rajasthan Police against Mr. Padamchand Jain, Mahesh Mittal (proprietor of Shree Ganpati Tubewell Company), Mr. Piyush Jain and others. All of them have been accused of giving bribes to obtain tenders, get the bills sanctioned and cover up irregularities in works executed for various tenders received from the PHED.
The PHED is the implementing agency in the State for the JJM, which was launched by the Union government to provide safe and adequate drinking water through household tap connections. The ED has searched several premises in Jaipur and Dausa, belonging to senior PHED officials as well as former Minister Mahesh Joshi, in connection with the probe into the scam and has attached assets worth ₹11.03 crore so far.
Mr. Padamchand was produced before a special court here on Friday and was sent to the ED custody till June 18. The ED claimed that the suspects were involved in the purchase of stolen goods from Haryana for using them in their tenders and contracts.
“(Padamchand) Jain is one of the main accused and is in receipt of proceeds of crime in his firm. These proceeds were laundered and layered through a number of bank accounts held in his name and entities and in the name of his family members, which were further siphoned off by investment in immovable and movable properties,” the ED stated.
