PATNA: Eight months after investigators seized stacks of cash from the homes of senior Bihar officials, the question that first animated the case — whose money was it? remains unanswered. Now, a parallel state-level probe has reopened the trail, widening scrutiny into what authorities describe as a deeply entrenched tender-commission network spanning key government departments.
SVU Steps In as Mystery Over Seized Cash Deepens
A long-simmering corruption scandal in Bihar’s public works establishment has entered a new and complicated phase, as the state’s Special Vigilance Unit (SVU) prepares to interrogate two senior officials whose homes were raided by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) earlier this year. Although the ED recovered more than ₹9 crore in cash from their residences, the ownership of the money remains unresolved a vacuum investigators say is central to understanding how government contracts were allegedly sold, traded, and cleared behind the scenes.
The case, which began with an ED probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), has gradually evolved into a broader examination of the ways in which contractors, engineers, and high-ranking bureaucrats allegedly turned public tenders into private revenue streams.
A Contractor’s Testimony and the Web It Reportedly Exposed
Authorities first homed in on the network after interrogating contractor Rishu Ranjan Sinha, widely known in bureaucratic circles as “Rishushree.” According to officials familiar with the investigation, Sinha described a system in which commissions were informally fixed, payments funneled through intermediaries, and contract clearances contingent upon financial favors.
Sinha’s disclosures prompted the ED in March to carry out raids at the homes of seven officials. Among them were retired Chief Engineer Tarini Das and Finance Department Joint Secretary Mumukshu Chaudhary both long regarded as influential figures with deep administrative reach. In the span of several hours, investigators counted ₹7 crore at Das’s residence alone, using four currency-sorting machines and working through the night. Another ₹2 crore was retrieved from Chaudhary’s home.
Both men denied any knowledge of the money recovered. But investigators say Sinha’s testimony, when paired with transaction records and seized documents, pointed to a pattern: tenders in construction and related sectors allegedly moved forward only after informal payments were assured.
Inside the Alleged Tender-Commission Economy
As the inquiry widened, the ED and SVU each identified recurring methods by which officials are believed to have secured illegal income. Investigators say senior engineers charged commissions of 4–6 percent or more to clear tender files, while others reportedly withheld contractor bills until an additional 2–5 percent was paid to “facilitate” clearance. Another alleged mechanism involved pressuring contractors to buy construction materials from preferred vendors.
These vendors, officials claim, paid kickbacks to decision-makers in exchange for guaranteed business. The emerging portrait is one of a parallel system functioning inside public works departments, where routine administrative decisions acquired an unofficial financial value. Several IAS officers including Sanjeev Hans, Yogesh Kumar Sagar, and Abhilasha Sharma are now under scrutiny, though none have been formally accused of wrongdoing. The SVU is also examining whether the seized cash reflected only a fraction of the money that passed through these networks.
A New Phase of Inquiry and Persistent Uncertainty
While the ED has completed its first round of action and recommended FIRs under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the SVU’s fresh inquiry is expected to probe gaps left unaddressed. Investigators plan to question Das and Chaudhary on key points: where the seized money originated, who delivered it, and whether it was meant for further distribution within a larger chain of beneficiaries. Officials in the Building Construction Department say they have sought the ED’s documents to determine whether administrative action is warranted.
“The documents have not been received yet,” Secretary Kumar Ravi said. “Once they arrive, the department will proceed as per rules.”
