While acquitting Goa Transport Minister Mauvin Godinho and other accused in an alleged power rebate scam case, a Special Court came down heavily on the prosecution for not examining key witnesses, observing that its case weakened due to some witnesses, including the former Goa chief minister, the late Manohar Parrikar, “not entering the witness box”.The case stemmed from an FIR lodged on the complaint of then-Panaji MLA Parrikar, who was in the Opposition when the case was filed. Parrikar alleged that Godinho, who was the Minister for Power in the Congress-led government in 1998, committed fraud by issuing two notifications in 1996 to grant a 25 per cent rebate to some industrial units without the approval of the Cabinet, thereby causing a loss to the state exchequer.The complaint stated that Godinho and others entered into a criminal conspiracy and caused wrongful gain to the two industrial units and corresponding loss to the state exchequer. A Special court framed charges against Godinho and six other accused under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 120 B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC in 2006. Godinho joined the BJP in 2016 – three months before the 2017 assembly polls – and went on to become a Minister in the Parrikar-led Cabinet.The court on Monday acquitted all the accused of offences under Section 120B, while two of the accused, including Godinho, were acquitted of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.In an order, Special Judge, North Goa, Merces, Irshad Agha said, “Examination of the complainant, late Manohar Parrikar, the acting chief minister at the relevant time, Pratapsingh Rane and Pachau (then power secretary) are not examined by the prosecution. The inference is that the witnesses did not wish to enter the witness box deliberately to conceal material facts. Therefore, applying the said principle, the prosecution case weakens to a greater extent,” the court said.The court said the prosecution failed to prove that a criminal conspiracy was hatched by the accused for the benefit of the two industrial units at the cost of the government exchequer. The court ruled that the material brought on record does not point out that the accused had entered into any conspiracy.“At the most, the act of the accused number 1 (Godinho) and 2 (then-chief electrical engineer T Nagarajan) in discharging official functions can be considered as irregularity not amounting to criminal misconduct,” the court said.Story continues below this adThe court said there are no allegations made in the chargesheet that Godinho and Nagarajan obtained for themselves or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage. “Neither in the brief facts made out in the charge sheet nor in the material brought on record, there is any material to show that any benefit has gone to accused number 1 or accused number 2,” it said.The court said that while the two accused may have committed mistakes while dealing with the request for a rebate, they “cannot be said to have done it deliberately with any criminal intent to benefit” the two companies.The court said the evidence brought on record does not show that Godinho “prevailed by any of the staff of the department or the power secretary in issuing the notifications.” “Material witnesses who ought to have been examined are not examined by the prosecution,” it said.The court also said that a closure report was earlier filed in the case and, subsequently, at the instance of the investigating officer, further investigation was carried out. “If further investigation was carried out, the closure report had to be produced. However, the report is not part of the chargesheet nor is it produced on record. This shows that the investigation was malafidely conducted,” the court said.Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram© The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:Goa