Ambedkar hospital corruption case: Chhattisgarh high court says no right to hearing before FIR

RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh high court has ruled that a prospective accused has no vested right to be heard before the initiation of criminal proceedings or the registration of FIR.

Justice Bibhu Datta Guru on Wednesday passed the order while dismissing a writ petition filed by a senior medical officer challenging a recommendation for registration of an FIR in connection with alleged corruption and misappropriation of public funds relating to the purchase and installation of PET CT Scan and Gamma Camera at the state-run Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital, Raipur.

The petitioner, the then Joint Director-cum-Superintendent at Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital in Raipur, had challenged a 2021 inquiry report and a subsequent government recommendation to lodge an FIR against him.

The matter pertains to alleged irregularities and misappropriation of public funds worth approximately Rs 18.45 crore during the purchase and installation of PET-CT Scan and Gamma Camera machines at the hospital. A six-member internal committee had earlier recorded adverse findings against the petitioner, alleging procedural lapses and lack of proper financial sanctions.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the recommendation for an FIR was arbitrary and lacked a material basis. It was contended that Dr Choudhary’s role was limited to providing technical specifications and that the procurement process was handled by the Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (CGMSC). The petitioner further claimed that the inquiry committee failed to provide him an opportunity of hearing, violating the principles of natural justice.

The State counsel opposed the petition, stating that the committee was merely a fact-finding body. They argued that the government has an independent power to investigate cognizable offences and that a prospective accused cannot demand a hearing before an investigation begins.

The Court noted that the petitioner was actively involved at crucial stages of the procurement process, including furnishing estimated costs and technical specifications. Justice Guru observed:

"A prospective accused has no vested right to be heard prior to initiation of criminal proceedings as the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) does not provide for a right of hearing before the registration of an FIR," the court said.

The court emphasised that the inquiry committee was a preliminary body assisting the government and did not determine final legal liabilities and ourts should be slow to interfere with the investigating agency’s power at the threshold.

The court further remarked that adherence to principles of natural justice is not mandatory during the reporting stage of a criminal offence.

The HC found no merit in the petition, stating that the inquiry report disclosed prima facie irregularities involving substantial public funds. The Court vacated the earlier interim order and dismissed the writ petition, allowing the state to proceed with the investigation.