Charges against VC and two others: DYFI, SFI pooh-pooh Pondicherry University’s rebuttal

PUDUCHERRY: The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) and the Students’ Federation of India (SFI) have pooh-poohed the rebuttal issued by Pondicherry University denying charges against vice-chancellor Gurmeet Singh, finance officer in-charge D Lazar and former director S Hariharan in connection with Rs 2.25crore misappropriation case.

The university alleged that DYFI secretary A Anand had filed the petition before the Madras high court deliberately without impleading Pondicherry University or any of its officers as respondents so that he could get along with suppression and misrepresentation of material facts.

Anand lodged a complaint with the CBI in February last year seeking action against Singh, Lazar and Hariharan for misappropriating Union government’s fund of Rs 2.25 crore by producing fake bills while conducting refresher and orientation courses for the teaching and non-teaching staff members. He moved the Madras high court, which directed the CBI to register a case and begin inquiries.

In a joint statement, Anand and SFI state president S Jayaprakash cited an order of the Supreme Court which declared that the accused can’t claim the right of hearing before registration of FIR. “…providing an opportunity of hearing to the accused in every criminal case before taking any action against them would frustrate the proceedings, obstruct the taking of prompt action as law demands, defeat the ends of justice and make the provisions of law relating to the investigation lifeless, absurd, and self-defeating,” the duo quoted the order.

The duo said the high court had highlighted the CBI’s submission that the agency had found ‘incriminating materials’ that “…Hariharan bribed Gurmeet Singh, vice-chancellor Pondicherry University, with Rs 50 lakh to give him to a clean chit to escape from the administrative action, criminal prosecution and also for full settlement of terminal benefits”.

“So, the name of Gurmeet Singh is figured out in the submission made by CBI, which has been recorded by the high court in its order, the two said.

They said the complaint was against the officials of the university and not against the university. “Let the university focus on improving its ranking in NIRF, which has been sinking since the assumption of charge by Singh as vice-chancellor. Already, the university has spent Rs 30 lakh in defending cases filed by 11 students and lost and faced contempt of court. Let the university refrain from protecting the accused by spending lakh and lakhs of rupees from its exchequer,” they said.