New Delhi. A Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi has extended the judicial custody of five accused in the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) sewage treatment plant (STP) tender case until September 17. Former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain was produced physically before the court, while the other accused appeared through video conferencing.
Jain, along with former DJB CEO Udit Prakash Rai, Nagendra Yadav, Ankit Shrivastava, Pankaj Verma and Raja Kumar Kurra, has been named as an accused in the case. The Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) had arrested the accused in connection with the alleged irregularities. Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh ordered the extension of judicial custody and directed jail authorities to produce the accused through video conferencing for the upcoming proceedings.
Bail Hearings Scheduled on Different Dates
The court is scheduled to hear Satyendar Jain’s bail application at 2 pm. The bail applications of the other accused are scheduled to be heard on September 5.
The ACB had sought an extension of judicial custody for Satyendar Kumar Jain, former Delhi minister in charge of the Water Department, former DJB CEO Udit Prakash Rai, AN Enterprises proprietor Nagendra Yadav, Euroteck Environment Pvt Ltd owner Raja Kumar Kurra, Srijanhar proprietor Pankaj Verma and former contractual DJB consultant Ankit Shrivastava.
Questions Raised Over Rohini STP Capacity Expansion
The investigation agency has alleged that changes were made to the technical proposal concerning the expansion of the Rohini sewage treatment plant. The original proposal reportedly envisaged increasing the plant’s capacity from 15 million gallons per day (MGD) to 25 MGD. The ACB alleges that the capacity was subsequently approved for expansion to 30 MGD at the ministerial level.
According to the agency, the change was made without adequate technical recommendations or a feasibility study. The ACB has further alleged that the inclusion of the Rohini and Narela STPs and exclusion of the Okhla Phase-V STP from the project resulted in an estimated cost escalation of around ₹123 crore.
Alleged Dilution of Environmental Standards
The investigation has also raised questions over alleged changes to environmental requirements prescribed by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB).
According to the ACB, the CPCB had prescribed eight mandatory parameters for the quality of treated effluent, but only five were included in the tender documents.
The agency alleges that important parameters such as pH, Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Total Nitrogen were omitted. Investigators have alleged that the changes could have provided an undue advantage to the technology provider concerned.
Alleged Role of Intermediary
The ACB told the court that the investigation indicated Nagendra Yadav allegedly acted as an intermediary between DJB officials and representatives of Euroteck.
According to the agency, KVNS Rao, associated with Euroteck, handed a letter to Yadav, which was subsequently delivered to Satyendar Jain’s office. The investigation alleges that Jain then directed Ankit Shrivastava, who was working as a contractual consultant with the DJB, to coordinate with Rao regarding a meeting.
The agency has cited recovered chat screenshots as part of the evidence supporting its allegations.
Investigation Into Alleged ₹2.7 Crore Transfer
The ACB has alleged that messages were exchanged between people linked to the STP tender process as early as August 2021. According to the agency, meetings held in December 2022 were followed by a significant increase in the project cost, with an alleged agreement involving a two per cent commission.
The investigation also allegedly found that Euroteck was the only company manufacturing the required equipment, while competing firms did not offer the same equipment.
The ACB further alleged that Ankit Shrivastava shared a tender corrigendum with Euroteck’s owner despite having no direct business connection with the STP. Sludge treatment was allegedly separated from the main STP contract so that a separate tender could be floated.
The agency claimed that the corrigenda were uploaded on the DJB website but were not adequately publicised through newspapers. It further alleged that around ₹2.7 crore was transferred from Euroteck to Srijanhar without any work being carried out, of which ₹1.22 crore was allegedly transferred to another company.
Satyendar Jain Denies Allegations
Senior Advocate N Hariharan, appearing for Satyendar Jain, argued that the tenders were floated in October 2022, when Jain was already in judicial custody in another case. The defence maintained that there was no evidence linking Jain to the tender process and that there were no valid grounds for his arrest.
Jain told the court that the government’s objective was to clean the Yamuna and increase the capacity of existing STPs. He said he had acted on the advice of technical officials and denied involvement in subsequent tender corrigenda or the award of the work, which took place after he was removed from office on May 30.
Jain also stated that the tender amount was around ₹1,546 crore at the time of tendering, while ₹1,938 crore was subsequently accepted. He questioned why the tender was not reissued if the authorities considered the prices inflated.
After hearing the submissions of both sides, the court extended the judicial custody of the accused until September 17.
https://www.linkedin.com/company/policetechnology
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
