Mukul Sangma Alleges Official Collusion in Meghalaya Illegal Coal Trade

Photo Courtesy: nenow

Shillong: Meghalaya Opposition leader Mukul Sangma claims authorities are shielding illegal coal miners. He says officials deliberately combine separate legal violations into single proceedings to stall justice. Sangma spoke to the media on Thursday. He argued that grouping cases creates legal gridlock, preventing courts from reaching clear decisions.

Legislators frequently hear the matter is sub-judice when they bring it up in the Assembly. Sangma noted that investigators often file FIRs only to close them later citing a lack of evidence. This practice lets offenders walk free. "Illegal activities are continuing," Sangma said. He pointed to committee reports confirming mining persists despite official claims of insufficient evidence.

The inventory math does not add up. The National Green Tribunal banned mining in 2014. By 2018, Sangma expected coal stocks to sit at 2 lakh metric tonnes following verified transportation. Instead, the figure climbed to 32 lakh metric tonnes. Sangma wants to know who approved that massive jump. He personally checked records in West Jaintia Hills and found a mismatch.

Sangma previously asked then Chief Secretary MS Rao for an independent investigation into the discrepancy. No action followed. He maintains that collusion keeps the illicit trade alive and wastes judicial time. Without a deep, independent probe, the state will never stop the leaks.

Disclaimer: The views and facts expressed here are solely those of the independent citizen journalist, researcher, and others, who assumes full responsibility for the content's accuracy and legality. Any third-party media (images, videos, or audio) used belongs to its respective owners and is shared strictly for reporting, criticism, or review under the "Fair Dealing" provisions of Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (India). NEWire.in does not claim ownership over such material and reserves the right to review, moderate, or remove content at its sole discretion upon receiving valid legal concerns or grievances.

Comments
Please login to comment.