CBI has made me an accused in the fodder scam for the actions that was not taken by me.

The pioneer-investigating agency CBI has presumably made me an accused in fodder scam of the Animal Husbandry Department of Bihar under a Conspiracy hatched up at the higher level. It looks queer when one takes into account different statements made by me in various Press Conferences, Floor of the Assembly and different public platforms. I had expressed in very clear and strong terms in 1993 the unauthorized withdrawals from various treasuries of the government continued and treasuries deliberately failed to maintain upto data account. I expressly warned, if the government did not take precautionary measures immediately an explosive financial position may erupt any day. This statement of mine was amply proved by the AHD scam today. One can well imagine how can I issue such statement had I been a party to the unauthorized withdrawal and financial irregularities.

It is really strange that a person who repeatedly pointed the adverse effects of financial irregularities and unauthorized withdrawals has been made an accused of the Fodder Scam cases by distortions of facts by the CBI perhaps with a design to tarnish my image politically. It was I who first raised the issue of unauthorized withdrawals from the government treasuries in the State Legislative Assembly and public meetings. On 2^nd April, 1993 I had said the on an average amount of 50 to 100 crores was being withdrawn from the treasuries with the connivance of the leaders, officers and contractors. Futher, on 4^th June, 1993 I demanded an enquiry by CBI or Comptroller and Accountant General of India in the unauthorized withdrawals from the state treasuries. In spite of such strong statements and demand for high level enquiries by me, my name has been dragged on baseless charges which can be ascertained by the facts noted below:- Sanction order of the Hon’ble Governor in Case No. RC 20 (A) 96.

At page 6 of the sanction order- “And Whereas it is alleged that on the recommendation of said Dr. Jagannath Mishra, Chief Minister, Shri Laloo Prasad had granted extension to accused Dr. S.B. Sinha for one year beyond 31.12.1993 rejecting well reasoned objection raised in this regard by the Finance Deptt.

Again at page 7 of the same order it is mentioned: “And whereas it is further alleged that Dr. Jagannath Mishra, Chief Minister, Bihar, Received a Letter on 23.9.1988 from the Co-conspirator said Sri Laloo Prasad in the capacity of Opposition Leader, Bihar, who had requested said Dr. Jagannath Mishra to promote accused Dr. Ram Raj Ram to the post of Director AHD. Dr. Jagannath Mishra promptly acceded to the request of said Shri Laloo Prasad and Promoted the said Dr. Ram Raj Ram to the post of Director, AHD irregularly and by superseding senior colleague.” It is a mater of record that on 23.09.1988 I was not the Chief Minister of Bihar and in fact Shri Bhagwat Jhe Azad was the Chief Minister of Bihar.  The real position as it transpires from the perusal of the concerned document supplied by the CBI (Document No. 404, file No. Est. (1) 1072/85 of AHD.) is as follows:

Dr. Ram Raj Ram was declared senior to Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma vide notification No. 10668 dated 3.12.1987. By notification No. 10670 dated 3.12.1987 Dr. Ram Raj Ram was appointed as Addl. Director, AHD in his existing pay scale. On a representation by Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma the department examined the mater. Although the Department suggested that Dr. Ram Raj Ram was senior to Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma, the Chief Secretary, after a detailed examination suggested that Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma’s dated promotion, which originally was 1.1.1977 and was later changed to a latter date should be restored to 1.1.1977 and he should be made Additional Director, by creating a shadow post, without however any retrospective financial benefit. Shri Bhagwat Jha Azad, then chief Ministe on 15.10.1988, approved the proposal. Had this order been implemented, Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma Would have been the senior most in the department after the Director and automatically the undisputed candidate for the post of Director on 31.7.1989. However on 23.11.1988 the Chief Minister Shri Bhagwat Jha Azad recorded an order for re-examination.

Thus it may be seen, if at all the Chief Minister readily agreed to the proposal of Shri Laloo Prasad in 1988, it was Shri Bhagwat Jha Azad and Not Me.

At later stage, while arguing on the matter of discharge, the CBI took the plea that it was a typing error However the CBI never bothered to request the Governor’s office to issue any corrigendum to the order. That it was not a typing error but a deliberate mischief on the part of the CBI can be established from the fact that on 26.6.1997, while opposing the anticipatory bail of mine in the Hon’ble Patna High Court and earlier before the Special Judge, CBI, the CBI counsel had emphasized this point. The CBI deliberately and with full knowledge mentioned my name as the C.M. in 1988 as it wanted to prove a reciprocal link between me and Shri Laloo Prasad by quoting two instances (1) Dr. Jagannath Mishra allegedly obliged Shri Laloo Prasad by making Dr. Ram Raj Ram, Director, AHD, (2) Shri Laloo Prasad obliged Dr. Jagannath Mishra by extending the services of Dr. S.B. Sinha, thus trying to prove their imaginary conspiracy. That it was a deliberate act may also be further realized by a simple reading of paragraph 36 of the charge sheet of case no. RC 20(A)/96 which is as follows: “Investigation has further disclosed that on 1.8.1988 Shri Laloo Prasad (A-20) who was then an MLA wrote a letter to the then Chief Mister of Bihar impressing upon him that Dr. Ram Raj Ram (A-11) was senior to Dr. Radhe Sham Sharma and hence deserved the post of Additional Director. Again on 23.09.1988 Shri Laloo Prasad (A-20) addressed another letter to the then Chief Minster requesting for the elevation of Dr. Ram Raj Ram to the post of Additional Director, AHD Shri Laloo Prasad (A-20) wrote a letter to the Chief Secretary, Bihar pleading for the appointment of Dr. Ram Raj Ram (A-11) as Director, AHD. In January 1990, Shri Laloo Prasad (A-20) wrote a letter to the then Chief Minister, Bihar, Dr. Jagannath Mishra exposing the cause of Acting Director, AHD Dr. Ram Raj Ram (A-11). Shri Laloo Prasad made consistent efforts to ensure the seniority, elevation and confirmation of accused Dr. Ram Raj Ram and continued to protect him after his own assumption of office as the Chief Minister of Bihar.” From perusal of file it appears that on 3.12.1989 Shri Dilkeshwar Ram Minister A.H.D put up a note recommending promotion of Dr. Ram without referring to the order of the Hon’ble Patna High Court and made recommendation to the Chief Minster for filling up the vacancy of Director from Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe. However, on 17.12.1989 I as the then CM did not agree with the said proposal and directed the Chief Secretary to constitute a selection committee and until a decision is taken, the charge should be given to the Secretary, Animal Husbandry.  It appears from the concerned file that thereafter a detail note was given to the Chief Minster by Shri Bilat Paswan Bihangam, Minster AHD on 22.12.1989 detailing the fact that C.W.J.C No. 6230/1989 is pending in the Patna High Court and in view of the order of the High Court, if the Secretary is given the charge of the Director, it may amount to disobedience of the Hon’ble High Court’s order. As the Hon’ble High Court has already stated in its order-dated 9.8.1989 that the present arrangement should be allowed to continue. The file was again put up before me on 4.1.1990 and I ordered for calling a meeting of the Selection Committee forthwith for selection of the Director. I also observed that the order dated 9.8.1989 of the Hon’ble High Court does not specifically say that till disposal of the writ application, the present situation should be allowed to continue and in any view, there was no restraint order on the power of the Government to constitute the selection committee, accordingly I modified the earlier order and directed to call for a meeting forthwith and to take decision within two weeks, otherwise with effect from 22.1.1990 the Secretary of the A.H.D will take over the charge of Director, A.H.D. Since no decision could be taken within the time frame a notification appointing Sri Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, Secretary, A.H.D as Director, A.H.D. was issued. These facts are born out from the documents filed by the C.B.I itself. Thus, from the aforesaid facts, it is manifest and cleared that I did not pass any order appointing Dr. Ram Raj ram on the basis of the letter of Shri Laloo Prasad dated January, 1990 and the records submitted and the documents filed by the C.B.I itself belies the allegation against me. Patronage given by Shri S. N. Sinha, the then C.M. to Dr. Ram Raj Ram, Former Director AHD Suppressed. When the post of Director AHD fell vacant on 31.7.1988, the department had pointed out that there was dispute regarding the seniority between Dr. Ram Raj Ram and Dr. Radhe Shyam Sharma and the charge of Director was given to the Secretary in similar circumstance in 1983. On this the Agriculture Production Commissioner had suggested that till the seniority dispute was decided the Secretary be given additional charge of director and the Chief Secretary submitted the proposal of APC to the Chief Minister through the Minister. On the suggestion of the Minister AHD, (Shri Dilkeshwar Ram) the then Chief Minister Shri Satyendra Narain Sinha ordered on 31.7.1989, overruling the recommendation of officers up to the Chief Secretary, that Dr. Ram Raj Ram, Additional Director be given the charge of Director and to convene the meeting of the Selection Committee to recommend the name for the post of director. Thus it may be seen that Dr. Ram Raj Ram was elevated as Additional Director and later as Acting Director when I was not the Chief Minister. Extension of Service of Dr. S.B. Sinha:- (i)  It has been stated by the CBI that on 31.12.1993 Dr. S.B. Sinha was to superannuate who had applied on 4.12.1993 for extension and filed a petition before the Director of A.H.D Dr.Ram Raj Ram. It is further stated that on 5.12.1993 I recommended for extension of service of Dr. Sinha for two years, though by then the shady deal and corrupt practice to Dr. S.B. Sinha was well known. (ii)   That in this regard document 401 to 403 i.e. file relating to extension of service of Dr. S.B. Sinha submitted by the C.B.I before the Hon’ble Court may kindly be referred to. It appears that the question of extension of S.B. Sinha has been dealt in the file. It further appears that the department submitted proposal of extension to the Vigilance Cell for its opinion. It further appears from perusal of the file that the Vigilance Cell reported that there was no departmental proceeding or any proceeding pending in the Court or continuing in any Judicial Court. Thus Vigilance cleared the case of Dr. S.B. Sinha that till that date there was nothing adverse against him. (iii)   That having received the clearance from the Vigilance Cell that there is nothing adverse against Dr. S.B. Sinha. The Director, A.H.D recorded on the file that Dr. Sinha bears good moral character and the Vigilance Department had also cleared his case and accordingly suggested for extension and thereafter the Minister, A.H.D. Sent the file to the then Chief Minister for his approval and on 30.12.1993 the then Chief Minister Sri Laloo Prasad ordered for extension of service of Dr. Sinha for one year. From the facts aforesaid it is manifest and clear that the Chief Minster did not order for extension acting solely on the basis of my recommendation dated 5.12.1993 rather the entire matter was examined at the different levels of the Government including the Vigilance Department and thereafter proposal was submitted by the department through the Minister before the Chief Minister. (iv)   That in view of the aforesaid “the statement in charge sheet that allegation made against Dr. Sinha was well-known” is imaginative story in as much as the vigilance Cell did not find Dr. Sinha involved in shady deal or in any proceeding either departmental or pending in any Court against Dr. Sinha. That from perusal of the charge sheet and the materials available on record it will appear that the investigating agency has based ground for submission of charge sheet against me on the materials showing nexus between Shri Laloo Prasad and me. The basis for showing nexus is a letter of recommendation made by me in favor of of Dr. S.B. Sinha (Since deceased) for whom in the Year 1993 I wrote to Shri Laloo Prasad, the then Chief Minster for extension of service. However, it is stated here that my letter was neither irregular nor motivated, since three other officers of the department had earlier been granted extension of service. That it is relevant to state and submit that as a matter of fact public leaders write letter in routine manner for those, who have approached them. Recommendations made by the politicians have no mandatory influence over the Government. So far the present case is concerned Shri Laloo Prasad, the then Chief Minster and others never took any step influenced with the recommendation made by me. As such the story of nexus between Shri Laloo Prasad and myself is absolutely baseless. That there are materials to show that a number of politicians on number of occasions wrote to the then Chief Minster in favor of AHD officials, who are not accused in any of the case till date. Shri Jai Kumar Palit, the then Member Bihar Legislative Assembly on 18.4.1988 and 18.9.1988 made recommendation in favor of Dr. Ram Raj Ram former Director AHD and one of the prime accused in the AHD cases. Shri Ganesh Prasad Yadav, Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly also on 13.7.1989 made similar recommendation in favor of Dr. Ram Raj Ram requesting the then Chief Minster to promote him on the post of Director. Shri Rajo Singh, as the Member, Bihar legislative Assembly and Chief WHIP of the Congress Legislative Party on 19.7.1993 made recommendation in favor of Sri Brijnandan Sharna, who is the main accused in RC. 20 (A)/96. He made a request to Shri Laloo Prasad to allow him to continue as the District Animal husbandry Officer at Chaibasa and on the said recommendation Shri Laloo Prasad, the then Chief Minister passed a specific order staying his transfer from Chaibasa to Hazaribagh. Shri Ram Jatan Sinha, the then Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly made recommendation for extension in service of Dr. G.N. Sharma, a officer of the animal Department against whom cases were pending. Smt. Padma Choubey, the then Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly and other members of the Legislative Assembly also made recommendation in favor of Dr. Capt. Verma for his appointment on the post of Director, Animal Husbandry. Shri Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi, the then Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly on 25.2.1992 and on 7.4.1992 made recommendation in favor of Dr. Indrabhan Prasad and on such recommendation Shri Laloo Prasad made specific order for extension of service of Dr. Indrabhan Prasad. It is relevant to state that at the relevant time when Sri Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi made recommendation in favor of Indrabhan Prasad, he was already facing vigilance inquiry. This fact is also mentioned in the charge sheet. Shri Umadhar Prasad Singh, the then Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly on 21.7.1989  made recommendation in favor of Dr. Ram Naresh Singh by writing a letter to the Chief Minster fo extending some favor. Shri Munshi Lal Pasawan the then Member, Bihar Legislative Assembly along with eight other members made recommendation for stay of Dr. Ram Raj Ram as Director on 16.1.1991 Shri Laloo Prasad the then CM Passed order of stay. It has been established practice in the democratic set up that the politicians normally make recommendation to the authority concerned in favor of ne or other but it does not given any right to the Government in power to act on such recommendation unless such recommendations are verified and are found genuine and valid. It is manifestly clear that a number of politicians made recommendation in favor of a number of officers of the Animal Husbandry Department but for malafide reason, I was picked up only on the basis of such recommendation, and have been made accused in three cases till date.

The CBI failed to take note of loud demand made by me on the floors of the State Assembly on 22.11.90 asking the government to more quickly against 14 charge-sheeted officials of the AHD. The 14 officials also included Dr. Ram Raj Ram. Had there been any nexus, why I would have raised the issue particularly when Dr. Ram Was involved? And when a spoke against AH officials in November 1990 how and from where came this inference of nexus. It was definitely the product of a biased mind predetermined to malign and smear me in the public mind.

Further, The predetermined scheming on the part of the CBI is proved to the hilt from a mention in the charge sheet about disclosure of unauthorized withdrawals from Government Treasuries by Shri Sushil Kumar Modi, B.J.P Leader in the State Assembly on 8.7.1993. On that day and for long thereafter I was the leader of the Opposition in the state assembly and it was me who had disclosed that Rs. 1200 crore had been withdrawn from government treasuries and that 50 treasuries of the state had no ready account. But unfortunately this statement of mine was purposefully put into the mouth of Shri S.K. Modi. I had also reminded the sate government in course of my speech that I had cautioned the state government in April 1993 that despite the embargo the politicians, officials and contractors connived and withdrew crores of rupees from treasuries, but the CBI gave the credit to Shri S.K. Modi, reasons best known to the CBI. How CBI was bet upon for refurbishing the image of Shri S.K.Modi and fabricating me in conspiracy can be judged from the fact that the investigating agency referred to Shri Sushil Kumar Modi as the person who raised the issue published in local Hindi newspaper on 4.6.93 regarding withdrawal of Rs. 1200 crore from treasuries in spite of the ban by the government in his short notice question no. 2 of 25.6.93 in Bihar Assembly. In fact it is blatant lie on part of the CBI. There was no Assembly sitting on 25.6.93, which can be verified from the records, and the 4.6.93 newspaper report was actually the press conference report of mine. On 4.6.1993, I had addressed a press conference and stated that Rs. 1.200 crore had been withdrawn illegally and that 50 treasuries had no up-to-date account. It has been stated in the charge sheet that on 7.6.1993 a high level meeting was held in C.M chamber on the issue of unauthorized withdrawals following publication of a report in the newspapers on 5.6.1993. The then Director of Treasuries gave a statement as a prosecution witness that the meeting was called following the publication of my statement in the newspaper dailies. But the charge sheet fails to mention my name since the CBI had already put these words in the name of Shri S.K. Modi. That the above fallacious and misleading report of the C.B.I. was born out of bias against me is established by the statement of Shri Anjani Kumar Sinha, IAS, dated 21.12.1996 provided by the CBI itself wherein he affirms that he was Additional finance Secretary from middle of 1992 till June, 1993 and during that tenure he also looked after the work of Directorate of Treasuries as its Director for about nine Months. He further affirms in this statement: “I Confirm that I was present in the said meeting which was held 7.6.1993 in main conference Hall, Old Secretariat, Patna …………. There were certain reports published in the newspapers about the heavy drawls from the Treasuries in Bihar in the month of March, 1993 which was termed as “March Loot”. I don’t remember to exact date of publication of this news. The allegation was actually leveled by Dr. Jagannath Mishra, the then Leader of Opposition about the said “March Loot:, Orders have been issued by the Cabinet Secretariat on the directions of Sri Laloo Prasad, Chief Minster for convening immediately meeting of all the Departmental Heads, District Magistrates, Treasury Officers etc. to discuss about the alleged excess drawls from the Treasuries…………” The above statement of Shri A.K. Sinha, IAS, proves beyond any iota of doubt that the C.B.I distorted facts for the reason best known to the premier investigation agency of the country. In the course of investigation the C.B.I persistently indulged in rank falsehood with intent to damage my image politically. I was the one who exposed the racket, called for dismissal of the government led by Shri Laloo Prasad, or at least imposition of financial emergency. I raised the issues on the floor of the Assembly and through newspapers, but the C.B.I. biased as it was, overlooked these aspects and involved me in the scam. I submit my case before you and would like to draw your kind attention to the prejudice act of the CBI and its peculiar way to defame my prestige and image that I have earned in three decades of public life. With Regards, Yours truly, (Jagannath Mishra) 15-08-1997