New Delhi: Former director general of DGHS Dr Vatsala Aggarwal, who has been arrested in the DGHS medical procurement scam, has claimed in her latest regular bail plea that she had merely approved decisions taken by Central Procurement Agency (CPA) and there was “no iota of connivance” on her part in the chargesheet filed on Sept 16.Aggarwal’s counsel submitted that, as director of Directorate General of Health Services, her role was limited to approving tenders forwarded by CPA. “At its best, prosecution can say that she was negligent in her conduct, but she was nothing more than an approver, who trusted the decision of the agency,” the counsel said.Special judge Vidya Prakash listed the matter for Oct 17. Orally noting that CPA was under DGHS’ purview, Prakash also said, “How can she be only approving everything, including single bidder? Did she not apply her own mind?”The prosecution opposed the bail plea, pointing to Aggarwal’s alleged role in a wider conspiracy involving co-accused Dr Vinod Kumar Ranga, Neeraj Chopra and private entities to “inflate prices of medical equipment” during her official duty as a public servant.It alleged that the entire tender process favouring Rajiv Kumar alias Rajiv Rangeela’s company was completed in a single day. Senior additional public prosecutor Kumar Sanjay submitted that all stages required under the Govt e-Marketplace rules, including publication, submission and evaluation of bids, determination of the eligible bidder and award of the contract, were completed with unusual haste to favour a single bidder.Sanjay alleged that while there were negligible transactions in accounts linked to F Med and M Sahib, both companies related to Rangeela, amounts ranging between Rs 50 lakh and Rs 65 lakh were withdrawn in multiple transactions till May 22 following a raid on May 18, indicating that the “accused got alert of the impending investigation”.The prosecution claimed that Aggarwal, having held the “senior position”, had official interaction with govt officials connected with all related activities. “Mere filing of the chargesheet does not, by itself, entitle the applicant to grant of regular bail, and the nature and gravity of the offences” must be considered, it submitted.
