Swati Maliwal, the head of DCW, is put on trial by a Delhi court on a serious corruption allegation.

Delhi Commission for Women Chairperson Swati Maliwal and 3 others accused of abusing their official status . Charges include corruption and criminal conspiracy charges against Swati Maliwal and 3 others .

Delhi (India), December 9 : After finding prima facie evidence that the accused had abused their official status by allegedly appointing Aam Admi Party (AAP) workers to different positions in the commission, a special court ordered the framing of corruption and criminal conspiracy charges against Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) Chairperson Swati Maliwal and 3 others on Thursday.The court observed that the facts reveal prima facie evidence that the accused had mistreated their official status, For the real offence Us 13(2) rw Sec.13(1)(d)13(2) of the POC Act, 13(1)(d)13(2), as well as Sec.13(2)(d)13(2).The POC Act, 13(1)(2), was enacted Charges will be framed accordingly, according to Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh.

According to the charges, all four suspects in the scheme were engaged in infringing on their official status and benefiting the party workers and acquaintances of Swati Maliwal as well as the ruling party, the AAP.According to sources, such workers and acquaintances were referred to various positions in the DCW without following due procedure.Instead, the appointments were made in violation of policies, Statutes, and Regulations, without even advertising for the positions, in violation of the General Finance Laws (GFR) and other laws, and money was allocated to such individuals as remunerationsalary honorarium.The Court found that the examination of the minutes of the meetings held by the DCW on various dates, in which all four accused were signatories, was sufficient to eliminate a strong belief that the appointments were made by the accused persons in accordance with one another.

the individuals so appointed, or that there was no dishonest motive Under Sec.103, a public servant causing a wrongful injury to the government by benefiting a third party would clearly fall under the scope of Sec.201.The court ruled that the accused persons' argument that DCW was entirely free in establishing posts or recruiting people of its choice is misplaced by the fact that DCW sought permission from the Government to fill up the vacant posts, according to a note and further proceedings dated 28.10.2015, which is part of the chargesheet.The court concluded that the above-mentioned facts lead to a strong argument that DCW was free to establisharbitrary appointments due to the fact that the Government did not

.
.
.
.