A Puzzling Turn: High Court Confronts Missing Records in High-Stakes IAS Corruption Probe

The halls of justice in Lucknow are currently witnessing a rather perplexing turn of events in a significant corruption inquiry, one that’s sure to raise a few eyebrows. The Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow bench finds itself grappling with a critical snag: the disappearance of crucial evidence – specifically, CCTV footage and relevant files – from none other than the Chief Secretary's office itself. This isn't just any case; it involves serious allegations against an IAS officer, Ritesh Kumar Singh, and the missing records are paramount to moving forward.

In a recent development, Chief Secretary Durga Shankar Mishra has formally submitted an affidavit to the court. The document acknowledges the ongoing efforts to locate these elusive records. However, and this is the sticking point, it also confirms that despite these attempts, the CCTV footage and the vital files pertaining to the inquiry against Mr. Singh remain untraceable. One can only imagine the administrative scramble this must be causing within the secretariat, especially given the high-profile nature of the case.

Responding to this affidavit, the court, presided over by Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam, has now granted the petitioner’s counsel a window of ten days to prepare and submit their reply. It's a procedural step, yes, but a necessary one to ensure all parties have a fair chance to react to such a critical disclosure. Indeed, the court had previously expressed what it termed “serious concern” over these disappearing records, underscoring the gravity of the situation and the potential implications for the fairness and thoroughness of the investigation.

This whole situation stems from a petition seeking a comprehensive probe into alleged corruption by Ritesh Kumar Singh during his tenure as the District Magistrate of Ghazipur. The petitioner had, quite naturally, highlighted the necessity of these records, particularly the CCTV footage from the Chief Secretary's office, as it was expected to shed light on certain aspects of the inquiry's progression and who might have accessed sensitive information.

What a predicament! The absence of such pivotal evidence from a high-level government office certainly casts a shadow over the investigation's path. As the petitioner's counsel now prepares their response, the spotlight remains firmly on the efforts to recover these missing pieces, without which, a clear picture in this significant corruption case seems ever more distant.