The Rewa cowshed fraud case has brought alleged irregularities in a publicly funded construction project under investigation after the Economic Offences Wing registered an FIR against six people, including government engineers and a contractor. The project was sanctioned at an estimated cost of Rs 37.85 lakh in Dabhoura, Rewa district, but investigators found only a partly built boundary wall and an incomplete structure at the site.
According to the EOW, Rs 27.38 lakh in bills was uploaded on the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act portal, of which Rs 20.22 lakh was paid. A physical inspection found no completed cattle sheds, borewell or water tank. The agency said the incomplete structure was unsuitable for use.
The project was intended to shelter destitute and stray cattle. Its approved components included a main cowshed, a calf shed, a fodder store, a shed for sick cattle, a borewell, a 6,000-litre water tank, a boundary wall and land levelling. Investigators found that only an 80-by-25-foot partly constructed boundary wall and an incomplete building were present.
The EOW alleges that officials in the Rural Engineering Services division bypassed the open tender process to favour a supplier, Deendayal Kushwaha of Chhatarpur. According to the agency, two allegedly forged short-tender documents for the same work were prepared, dated December 3 and December 31, 2020.
The investigation also found, according to the EOW, that neither the tender document fee nor the earnest money deposit was paid. Quotations were sought for 28 materials, but the supplier submitted an incomplete rate list covering only nine. Despite this, officials allegedly prepared a comparative statement showing the firm as the lowest bidder and issued a work order.
The FIR names former executive engineers Rajendra Singh Dhurve, D S Armo and Himanshu Tiwari; former sub-divisional officer Jagdish Singh Rajput; former assistant grade-III employee Laxman Prasad Shukla; and supplier Deendayal Kushwaha. The agency has invoked provisions relating to criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy, along with provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The case highlights the gap between expenditure recorded in a public works system and the physical condition of the asset on the ground. In this instance, the EOW’s physical verification was central to identifying that essential facilities listed in the project plan had not been completed despite payments being released.
The accused have been booked over alleged wrongdoing, and the allegations have not been established in court. The Economic Offences Wing said further investigation is underway.
