New Delhi: With Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) not seeking police custody of Delhi’s former water minister Satyendar Jain and four other accused, a city court Wednesday sent the five to 14-day judicial custody in Delhi Jal Board (DJB) sewage treatment plant (STP) tender case, while granting two-day police custody of DJB ex-consultant Ankit Srivastava.The defence argued that the FIR was registered in May 2024, but arrests were sought after 27 months despite the accused having consistently joined the probe. It also alleged that they were not provided with the grounds of arrest. Srivastava’s counsel further submitted ACB had no material linking him to the alleged offences and that his arrest was “actuated by malice”.Rejecting the plea, Judge Dig Vinay Singh noted that “even though the accused may have joined the investigation at earlier instances whenever called by the agency, it cannot be claimed today merely on that ground that the investigating officer (IO) could not have arrested the accused when they last appeared before him”.The court also noted, “At this stage, it can’t be claimed that the reasons for arrest mentioned… are insufficient… Be it noted here that Section 409 of IPC has also been invoked in this matter together with conspiracy, and the maximum punishment provided therein is imprisonment for life.”ACB alleged the tendering process for augmentation and upgradation of 10 sewage treatment plants (STPs) was manipulated to favour Euroteck Environmental Pvt Ltd (EEPL), causing a loss to the exchequer. It alleged that Jain, then a minister, arbitrarily increased the capacity of Rohini STP from 15 MGD to 30 MGD without technical feasibility studies. Rohini and Narela were included while Okhla Phase-V was excluded, resulting in an estimated Rs 123-crore cost escalation, the agency alleged.ACB further claimed that during the preparation of terms of reference, a proposal to relax the oxygen transfer efficiency requirement from 4 kg/kwh to 2 kg/kwh to encourage competition was rejected by then DJB CEO Udit Prakash Rai and Jain.The court noted the restrictive condition was removed only after most bidders had left the process, and that only five of eight CPCB-mandated environmental parameters were incorporated into the tender, thereby reducing costs for EEPL while “harming the environment”.On Srivastava’s alleged role, the court relied on ACB’s submission that Jain and he were allegedly in a conspiracy, with the latter directed to coordinate with EEPL representative KVNS Rao.Mobile phone data allegedly showed a nexus between Srivastava, Rao and Nagendra Yadav, who ACB claimed acted as an intermediary between Jain and Rao. “WhatsApp mobile chats indicate Srivastava was requested not to incorporate floating media into the tender on the ground that it would make other competitors eligible through cheaper rates causing EEPL to lose the tender,” the court noted.The agency claimed that on Dec 22, 2021, EEPL entered into an agreement with Srijanhar Enterprises, a proprietorship concern of Pankaj Verma, nephew of Vinod Chauhan — a neighbour of Jain — for a 3% commission on DJB works.EEPL allegedly transferred around Rs 2.7 crore to Srijanhar, which was then routed to Yadav’s AN Enterprises. Of this, Rs 61 lakh was allegedly transferred to Rai’s bank account on Jan 19, 2023, and Rs 91 lakh to his mother-in-law for purchasing immovable properties. Chats between Yadav and Raj Kumar Kurra, director of Euroteck, allegedly contained evidence of a Rs 75-lakh hawala transaction.Jain, however, said the objective was to clean Yamuna and that augmenting the existing STPs was chosen because constructing new plants would have taken four to five years.“I was a minister holding eight portfolios. How would I know every technical aspect? I had to rely on experts,” Jain submitted, questioning why he was being quizzed on technical aspects of the tender process.The AAP functionary said the initial estimate was to treat 300 MGD at Rs 5 crore per MGD, with four tender packages having a combined bid amount of around Rs 1,500 crore. He said he was removed from the ministry after May 30, 2022, following his arrest in another case, and alleged the investigators were seeking to “rope in a big name”. “Jo bhi case banana hota hai, Satyendar Jain ko jod dete hain,” he said.The court has listed the hearing on bail applications filed by Jain, Rao, Verma, Rai and Kurra on Aug 25.
