After a raging controversy for 18 years over its procurement, Bofors guns are again in news with the CBI registering a preliminary enquiry into the purchase of its spares saying that negotiations for buying the parts were carried out in a "slipshod" manner when George Fernandes was the Defence Minister.
According to one of the three PEs registered by the investigating agency on Saturday, a contract was concluded on August 24, 1999, with Celsius System of Sweden for supply of 489 items of spares for the 155 mm Field Howtizer guns costing Rs 97.65 crore (186 million Swiss Kroner).
Bofors case 'buried'; CBI fails to appeal
The spares were procured to meet the urgent requirement of the Army to maintain the guns in serviceable condition and the then Defence Minister was the Competent Final Authority (CFA).
The PE said that out of the Rs 97.65 crore, Rs 75.08 crore was to be adjusted towards the recovery of exuded HE107 shells supplied earlier by the orginal supplier of these guns.
Bofors case: 'All is not lost'
"Audit scrutiny revealed that the rates incorporated in the contract were much higher than the rates offered by the firm in June 1999, which were valid on the date of the contract, which resulted in additional expenditure of Rs 6.73 crore," the PE said, adding that the Ministry did not give any reason for allowing the higher rates.
The CBI alleged that the contract was poorly negotiated and the Ministry allegedly issued amendments to the contract thus causing additional burden of Rs 9.61 crore on the exchequer.
The parts sought by the Defence ministry included Distribution Box power unit, Torque Motor, Pump, Pressure Vessel, Cylinder, Suspension Unit, Laying Valve, Control Panel C 31, Rammer, Brush Kit and Levelling Device.
The PE said, "such slipshod scrutiny of the contract and poor negotiations could not yield any operational advantage as the spares could not materialise before March 2000 and November 2000.
"Since there is no explanation offered to the incriminating points made and since the rates incorporated in the contract were much higher than the rates offered by the firm in June 1999 (that resulted in an additional expenditure of Rs 6.73 crore), the acts of omission and commission on the part of the concerned unknown public servants and others responsible for this call for a probe," the CBI said.
