A special CBI court in Chandigarh has rejected the regular bail application of Amit Kumar, a contractual accounts clerk with the Haryana Labour Welfare Board, in a case involving the alleged diversion of Rs 50 crore in government funds through an unauthorised bank account.
Special judge Vijayant Sehgal observed that the investigation had prima facie established Kumar’s active involvement in the alleged conspiracy. The court also said that the evidentiary value of the material would be tested during the trial, indicating that the findings at the bail stage do not amount to a final determination of guilt.
According to the prosecution’s case, Kumar facilitated the opening of an unauthorised savings account with IDFC First Bank without approval from the competent authority. Investigators allege that the account was subsequently used to divert funds belonging to the Haryana Labour Welfare Board.
The court took note of allegations that Kumar shared the photograph of an authorised signatory and the mobile number of co-accused Abhishek Singla through WhatsApp. The information was allegedly provided to facilitate the opening of the account and the receipt of SMS alerts connected to it.
Investigators also alleged that Kumar communicated with the bank through another accused, Abhay Kumar, using WhatsApp, while deliberately keeping email correspondence off the record. The prosecution further alleged that he concealed a bank communication dated May 6, 2025, which disclosed the actual account balance and stated that no fixed deposit had been created.
The court also considered allegations that Kumar deleted WhatsApp conversations with Abhay Kumar to conceal the transactions. A cash deposit of Rs 50,000 into Kumar’s account, reflected in chats retrieved from Abhay Kumar’s phone, was cited by the prosecution as an alleged quid pro quo.
“The prosecution has prima facie pointed to the active involvement of the applicant-accused in the whole conspiracy,” the court observed. The judge added that the material’s evidentiary value would be examined during the trial.
Kumar, who was arrested on July 8, 2026, argued that he had only been performing clerical duties, possessed no decision-making authority and was no longer required for custodial interrogation. The court did not accept those grounds, referring to the alleged fraud’s magnitude and its impact on public finances.
The case places scrutiny on the controls used by public bodies to authorise bank accounts, verify signatories and monitor the movement of welfare funds. The court’s order, however, concerns bail and does not establish criminal liability, which will be determined through the judicial process.
