What led to the imprisonment of a Bihar postal accountant for two years?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a significant ruling, a Special CBI Court in Patna sentenced an accountant to two years in prison for fraudulently receiving salaries from two government jobs. This case highlights issues of corruption and misuse of power within public service. Discover the details of this alarming case.
Key Takeaways
- Lohra Bhagat received dual salaries from two government positions.
- The court sentenced him to two years in prison and fined him.
- The CBI uncovered his fraudulent activities.
- Corruption in public service requires urgent attention.
- Integrity in government roles is crucial for public trust.
Patna, July 22 (NationPress) A Special CBI Court in Patna has handed down a sentence of rigorous imprisonment (RI) for two years along with a fine of Rs 1.10 lakh to an accountant of India Post for illicitly drawing salary from another government entity for a period of three years.
Lohra Bhagat served as a Senior Accountant in the Department of Post and as Deputy Chairman of the Bihar State Scheduled Tribe Commission, Patna, from July 2010 to July 2013.
Throughout this timeframe, he received a total salary of Rs 3,41,444 from the Government of India’s postal department, in addition to Rs 14,87,591 and various other expenses, including a leased vehicle costing Rs 32,850 monthly, from the Government of Bihar.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) initiated the case on March 31, 2014, against Lohra Bhagat and others.
The investigation commenced following a complaint that alleged Lohra Bhagat, while acting as a Senior Accountant in the office of the Director of Accounts, Patna, in the Postal Department from 2010 to 2013, managed to secure his appointment as Deputy Chairman of the Scheduled Tribe Commission within the Government of Bihar.
He also operated on the Bihar government’s Scheduled Tribe panel for three years, utilizing forged documents and adopting the alias Lalit Bhagat.
Consequently, he was able to hold both positions and receive salaries from both departments, as stated by the CBI.
During the investigation, it was confirmed that Lohra Bhagat and Lalit Bhagat are two identities of the same individual.
The Court determined that Lohra Bhagat, also known as Lalit Bhagat, through his actions, deceived both the Government of India and the Government of Bihar, causing wrongful losses of Rs 3,41,444 and Rs 14,87,591 respectively, while benefiting himself.
Following the investigation, the CBI filed a charge sheet against the accused on March 31, 2015.
The Special Court acknowledged the validity of the charges and sentenced him appropriately.
Moreover, the CBI extended its investigation to include the roles of Bihar government officials who assisted the postal employee in his fraudulent appointment to the Scheduled Tribe Commission using forged documents.
Point of View
It is crucial to ensure that public servants uphold integrity and transparency. The case against Lohra Bhagat serves as a reminder of the need for stringent checks against corruption, emphasizing that accountability must be maintained in all government sectors to restore public trust.
NationPress
22/07/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What were the charges against Lohra Bhagat?
Lohra Bhagat was charged with drawing salaries from two government jobs simultaneously, utilizing forged documents to secure his position as Deputy Chairman of the Bihar State Scheduled Tribe Commission while also working as a Senior Accountant in the Postal Department.
What was the outcome of the case?
The Special CBI Court sentenced Lohra Bhagat to two years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 1.10 lakh for his fraudulent activities.
How long did Lohra Bhagat draw dual salaries?
Lohra Bhagat drew dual salaries for a duration of three years from July 2010 to July 2013.
What role did the CBI play in this case?
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) initiated an investigation after a complaint was filed, leading to the charges against Lohra Bhagat and subsequent court proceedings.
What is the significance of this case?
This case highlights the ongoing issues of corruption and misuse of power within government sectors, emphasizing the need for rigorous checks and balances to prevent such occurrences.
