During investigation, it was revealed that public servants entered into a criminal conspiracy and colluded with private persons and sanctioned insurance claims based on forged documents, thus causing loss to the New India Assurance, said the agency
Ahmedabad: A special CBI court in Ahmedabad on Monday sentenced five persons, including a former PSU employee, to five years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and imposed a collective fine of Rs 23.5 lakh in a 22-year-old case related to fraudulent insurance claims.
A special CBI court in Ahmedabad on Monday sentenced five persons, including a former PSU employee, to five years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and imposed a collective fine of Rs 23.5 lakh in a 22-year-old case related to fraudulent insurance claims.Charges against another accused, SA Parmar, were abated as he died during the pendency of the trial in a case dating back to January 30, 2003.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had registered a case against the then-senior divisional manager of New India Assurance Company Ltd (NIACL) at Navsari (Gujarat) and others relating to sanctioning of insurance claims based on forged documents, thus causing loss to the public sector firm to the tune of Rs 4.89 lakh.
During investigation, it was revealed that public servants entered into a criminal conspiracy and colluded with private persons and sanctioned insurance claims based on forged documents, thus causing loss to the New India Assurance, said the agency.
Accused Manan and Dinesh Patel made arrangements for fake papers to submit insurance claims against their general policies, while Chitre (then a NIACL employee) assessed the claim on the basis of the bogus documents and arranged for photographs showing an “accident” as genuine, it said.
Accused Bialbhai, the then-ASI/in-charge outpost Mehlol under Godhra Taluka police station in Panchmahals district, lodged a fake FIR and prepared bogus ‘panchnama’ (spot report) to prove the loss had indeed occurred. Co-accused Rajput, a recovery agent, arranged for the recovery amount through bank instruments so that the entire transaction appeared to be genuine, according to the CBI.
The central probe agency filed a chargesheet on June 24, 2005, and during the trial, 25 prosecution witnesses were examined and 228 documents/exhibits relied upon in support of the charges against the accused persons.