The Anti-Corruption Bureau has completed its investigation into a bribery case involving an FDA clerk inside the Maharashtra Secretariat, but the state government has yet to grant the necessary prosecution sanction.
- ACB has completed the probe into a ₹35,000 bribe case involving an FDA clerk.
- The state government has remained silent on the prosecution sanction request for over a month.
- The case sparked political turmoil, with calls for Minister Narhari Zirwal's resignation.
In a rare and high-profile operation, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) conducted a trap inside the Mantralaya, the nerve center of the Maharashtra government, leading to the arrest of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clerk. While the investigation is now complete and evidence has been gathered, the case has hit a bureaucratic deadlock as the state government has failed to respond to the request for prosecution sanction.
The incident dates back to February 13, when Rajendra Dherange, a Class III FDA clerk, was allegedly caught red-handed accepting a bribe of ₹35,000. The funds were reportedly demanded from a Mumbai-based medical store owner in exchange for restoring a suspended license. Initially, the demand was ₹50,000, which was later negotiated down. The ACB's operation was particularly sensitive given that the trap occurred on the second floor of Mantralaya, near the office of Minister Narhari Zirwal.
Why This Matters
BozokMedia analysis shows that this case highlights a critical systemic vulnerability where the very institution tasked with governance becomes a site of corruption. The delay in granting prosecution sanction is not merely a procedural lag but a political liability. By stalling the legal process, the administration risks appearing as though it is shielding its own, thereby undermining the credibility of the Anti-Corruption Bureau's efforts to clean up the state secretariat.
The political fallout was immediate. Harshvardhan Sapkal, the Maharashtra Congress president, demanded the immediate resignation of Minister Narhari Zirwal, alleging that corruption is flourishing within the state's highest administrative office. While Zirwal denied any personal involvement and claimed the clerk acted independently, the controversy led to the removal of his private secretary, Dr. Ramdas Gade, who was repatriated to his parent department.
The legal shield provided by Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act often becomes a tool for administrative delay, effectively pausing justice until political winds shift.
Under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a court cannot take cognizance of certain offenses against a public servant without prior sanction from the competent authority. ACB Director General Sanjiv Singhal confirmed that the proposal was sent over a month ago. If no response is received within 90 days, the agency will review the evidence and issue a formal reminder.
Further complicating the case is the discovery of an additional ₹42,000 in cash found with Dherange during the raid. Since Mantralaya security rules permit only ₹10,000 in cash inside the premises, the ACB is now investigating the source of these additional funds, alongside a deep dive into the accused's bank records and call logs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1: Why is prosecution sanction necessary in this case?
According to the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a court cannot trial a public servant for bribery without official permission (sanction) from the government to prevent malicious prosecutions.
No, the ACB stated that no evidence was found linking the Minister or his PA to the bribe; the primary accused is the Class III clerk, Rajendra Dherange.
