The National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the dastardly Pulwama terror attack and after months of investigation, the agency cracked the case. But a recent news report brought the investigating agency under a lot of criticism over some allegations of dubious bills by a senior officer. Without providing any concrete evidence, an article made serious allegations against an NIA officer based in J&K. But the investigating agency has responded to the allegations and found them to be baseless.

In a statement released by NIA on Monday, the agency stood firmly with the J&K officer, against whom a false and baseless article was published recently. NIA confirmed that a probe was submitted to the MHA declaring that the officer in question demonstrated highest standards of professionalism and integrity.

National Investigation Agency
National Investigation Agency (NIA)Twitter

"Reporting of unverified facts causes dissatisfaction and demotivation amongst various ranks and has the potential to adversely impact their performance. NIA is fully committed to maintain highest level of probity amongst its work force and does not condone any misdemeanor of any rank and file," the official NIA statement read.

What were the allegations?

A baseless article accused a Superintendent of Police (SP) rank IPS officer in J&K, posted with the NIA, of submitting dubious bills worth close to Rs 2 lakh for reimbursement. The report further alleged that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the controlling body of the NIA, even approved the reimbursements. However, when an inquiry was ordered, the officer returned the entire amount claiming it was reimbursed in error.

Pulwama attack
IANS

But the report did not submit any evidence to prove its allegations against a decorated officer who was part of the team investigating the Pulwama terror attack, rather cited anonymous sources. The article did not corroborate the information and published it without an official response from the MHA or NIA. However, the NIA released its statement to debunk the baseless allegations in the article dated July 3.