IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON: 09.04.2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 09.09.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.8229 of 2025 Vincent Ramesh Babu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Vellore.

2.The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Vellore. ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No.8 of 2021 dated

25.06.2021 on the file of the second respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari Senior Counsel for Ms.V.Srimathi For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER The petitioner/A3 in Crime No.8 of 2021 for the offence under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A of IPC and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(b) r/w. 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 filed this quash petition.

2.The contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was serving as Block Development Officer from 2017 to 2018 and as Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) in Alangayam Panchayat Union served from 13.03.2019 to 20.06.2019, thereafter he was transferred as Block Development Officer (Block Panchayat), Vellore. The petitioner served as Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) for a period of three months. During this period, he was assigned with election duty till 18.04.2019. When the petitioner resumed with to his regular duties, he conducted inspection with respect to Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana (Gramin) Scheme [PMAY-G] being implemented. The Scheme was commenced in the year 2016, at that time, the petitioner was posted in Alangayam Panchayat Union. The process of selection, identification of beneficiaries, identification of land, freezing of bank accounts all already completed by his Predecessor Block Development Officer, the petitioner had no role in these processes. But now the case projected against the petitioner is that there have been improper implementation of the Scheme, no followed, the guidelines issued, it is seen that once the beneficiaries' accounts included and frozen, it is not changeable and no corrections can be made even by the petitioner. The petitioner himself identified the fraud, mentioned in the FIR while conducting physical inspection and sent a letter to the Deputy Director/Project Director and District Rural Development Authority [DRDA], Vellore on 11.06.2019 informing action taken for improper implementation of the scheme stating that the Computer Assistant was stopped from the work and another Computer Assistant appointed to operate the computers. Further the said person was given training, the Accountant and Assistant transferred to other Panchayats. These are 2424 houses being constructed under the Scheme. The petitioner found that mistakes committed in identifying the beneficiaries with Geo Tag. Further the beneficiaries' bank accounts not properly given, Geo Tag showed already constructed houses and hence appropriate steps taken to rectify the mistakes. Further to take proper implementation of the Roof Cost, by verifying the account details and ECS transfer. In the above case, the same irregularities are being investigated. In fact, it is the petitioner as a whistle blower found out the improper implementation of PMAY-G Scheme.

3.The learned senior counsel would submit that as per the Scheme, the petitioner has to inspect as far as possible 10% of the houses under construction, for which he carried inspection, identified the irregularities and sent a report. Further, the improper transfer of amount to non- beneficiaries now recovered as per the directions of the proceedings issued by the Director of District Rural Development Authority dated 19.01.2024. The petitioner served as Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) only for a period of three months, during this period he was also deputed to election duty, within the limited period of his service the peti