Panaji: The investigation into the Louis Berger bribery case “could not be completed in the absence of custodial interrogation of former Chief Minister Digamber Kamat,” Goa government informed the state Assembly.
“The application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to accused Digamber Kamat is pending before Supreme Court. “Hence investigation in respect of accused Digamber Kamat could not be completed as his custodial interrogation is essential to unearth the deep rooted conspiracy,” Chief Minister Laxmikant Parsekar said in a written reply yesterday to a question tabled by Kamat on the floor of the House.
Kamat is presently a Congress MLA from Margao seat. The Goa Police has been probing the involvement of several government officials as well as politicians and the US company officials in the multi-crore bribery scandal. The case was filed on July 21, 2015, by state Home department against Kamat, ex-PWD Minister Churchill Alemao and other officials, including those of US-based Louis Berger firm and also JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency).
The US firm has been charged with bribing Indian officials with several crores of rupees to win two major water developmental projects in Goa and Guwahati. The Rs 1,031-crore project, funded by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), was approved when Digamber Kamat government was in power, for augmenting water supply in south Goa and laying sewerage lines in the state’s major cities.
Kamat, also accused of accepting bribes, was given anticipatory bail by a district court in August. Parsekar told the House that during the course of investigation, the former officials of Louis Berger, in their statements recorded before a magistrate, confessed about approximate bribes allegedly paid to the then CM Digamber Kamat and then PWD Minister Churchill Alemao amounting to Rs 1.20 crore and 75 lakh, respectively.
“Further, section 201 IPC was added to the present crime, as the accused Digamber Kamat influenced government officials to manipulate RTI information (related to the case) for facilitating him during arguments in anticipatory bail application,” he said in the written reply.
In the question tabled on the floor of the House, Kamat had sought notings of the case and also communication between the crime branch and the company which was refused by Parsekar, saying that the case was sub-judice.
