Guwahati: The original complainants in the high-profile Louis Berger bribery scandal on Thursday filed a formal objection and protest petition before the Special Judge, CBI court in Guwahati, strongly opposing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)’s closure report in the high-profile case.
The complainants–Abdul Wahed and Jayanta Gogoi–in their submission directly challenged the Final Report submitted by the CBI’s Anti-Corruption-I branch, New Delhi, on May 12, 2026, which recommended dropping criminal proceedings against all parties citing an absence of prosecutable evidence.
Gauhati High Court advocates Santanu Borthakur and Krishna Gogoi represented the complainants before the CBI special court, presenting the petition against the closure report.
Challenge to CBI’s “Premature” Closure
In their protest petition, the complainants contended that the CBI’s decision to close the case is premature, legally flawed, and failed to exhaust vital investigative avenues. A central point of contention highlighted in the objection is the CBI’s own admission that the Letter Rogatory dispatched to the United States on April 24, 2016, remained completely unexecuted.
The judicial request had sought certified copies of US court judgments and the examination of six key individuals, including former Louis Berger executive James McClung and Federal Bureau of Investigation personnel. The petitioners argued that the agency cannot legitimately cite a lack of evidence when the formal process initiated to collect crucial overseas documents and witness testimonies was never completed.
Procurement Process vs. Money Trail
The objection further criticized the CBI for confining its inquiry primarily to the procedural regularities of the procurement process rather than tracking the illicit money trail.
While the CBI’s final report stated that the selection of the Project Management Consultant for the JICA-funded South Central and North Guwahati Drinking Water Supply Project adhered to official guidelines, and that scrutiny of select sub-contractors’ bank accounts showed no direct transactions to public servants on the selection committee, the petitioners termed this approach fundamentally deficient. They argued that kickbacks are routinely routed through intermediaries, offshore conduits, or layered entities rather than simple direct bank transfers.
In addition, the complainants pointed out that the CBI’s own report referenced an internal investigation by US law firm Baker & McKenzie LLP, which found circumstantial evidence of potentially improper payments made to Assam government officials between 2009 and 2013. They also highlighted an email communication between Prasana Shah and James McClung dated August 17, 2010, asserting that such leads warrant deeper forensic scrutiny rather than summary dismissal.
Background and Relief Sought
The case originated in July 2015 when an FIR was registered at Dispur Police Station following international disclosures that New Jersey-based firm Louis Berger had paid approximately Rs 6 crore in bribes to Assam ministers and officials to secure consultancy contracts for the Guwahati Water Supply Project.
Following directions from the Gauhati High Court on September 1, 2017, the CBI took over the case from the Assam CID and re-registered the FIR under sections 120-B, 406, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, alongside the Prevention of Corruption Act. Investigating Officer Ankit Meena, Dy. SP, CBI AC-I, forwarded the closure report on May 12, 2026, concluding that no prosecutable evidence had emerged.
In their prayer, the petitioners urged the Special CBI Court to reject the May 12 closure report and direct a comprehensive investigation into the unexecuted Letters Rogatory, foreign witnesses, and the ultimate beneficiaries of the payments. Alternatively, they requested the court to take cognizance of the offenses directly under Section 210 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita based on the existing record and proceed to trial.