GUWAHATI: In a move that has ignited a fresh wave of controversy, an officer of the Assam Police Service (APS) implicated in the notorious Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) cash-for-job scam has been assigned to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). This appointment has stirred concerns about the propriety of assigning such an officer to a national agency.
Rumir Timungpi, a member of the APS, finds himself in the center of the storm. He was among the accused individuals entangled in the APSC cash-for-job scandal that shook Assam back in 2013. The scandal saw the indictment of numerous officials from the Assam Civil Services and Assam Police Services on allegations of involvement in corrupt activities.
An order dated August 11 reveals that Timungpi has been designated to serve as an Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP) within the NIA, operating on a deputation basis for a span of three years. This decision to allow Timungpi's deputation has not been immune to criticism, particularly considering his alleged involvement in a significant corruption case.
The controversy has also extended to the Home Department's decision to produce a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for Timungpi's deputation to the NIA. Critics argue that such a step raises questions about the integrity of the selection process and the commitment to addressing corruption at its roots.
The APSC cash-for-job scandal, a blot on Assam's administrative history, prompted an investigation led by retired judge Biplab Sarma. Timungpi, one of the implicated individuals, faced a slew of accusations tied to the scandal. The inclusion of his name in the list of those chosen for deputation to the NIA has reignited public scrutiny and skepticism about the government's stance on combating corruption.
In a time when governmental transparency and accountability are paramount, the decision to bring an accused officer into a nationally vital investigative agency raises concerns about the message being conveyed. This development underscores the delicate balance between administrative staffing choices and the imperative to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of law enforcement institutions.
ALSO WATCH: