Raipur police Friday issued a lookout notice against Dr Puneet Gupta, the son-in-law of former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh, in a case of alleged financial irregularities, an official said.
Gupta is accused of committing financial irregularities worth Rs 50 crore during his tenure as the superintendent of a state government hospital in Raipur.
According to police, the lookout notice was issued as Gupta did not respond to the two notices earlier sent by police, asking him to appear before it in connection with the case lodged on March 15, they said.
"A lookout notice (LOC) has been issued against Dr Gupta, who is on the run, to ensure that he is not able to leave the country," Raipur Superintendent of Police Arif Sheikh told PTI.
A lookout notice is an intimation to immigration authorities at all the ports of exit to intimate the investigation agency in case the accused tries to leave the country.
"Earlier, two notices had been issued against Gupta seeking his statement in the case, to which he did not respond," the SP said.
On March 15, a case was registered against Gupta for allegedly committing financial irregularities to the tune of Rs 50 crore when he was the superintendent of DKS Post Graduate Institute and Research Centre, Raipur.
Incumbent superintendent of DKS hospital Dr Kamal Kishore Sahare had lodged a complaint in this regard.
In his complaint, Sahare said that a probe committee had found that Gupta allegedly misused his position and committed a fraud of Rs 50 crore.
After the Congress was elected to power in the state assembly election recently, Dr Gupta was shifted from DKS Hospital to Raipur Medical College as Officer on Special Duty (OSD).
However, in February, he resigned from the government service after a case was registered against him by a Congress leader in connection with the alleged fixing of Antagarh Assembly bypoll held in 2014 during the previous BJP regime in Chhattisgarh.
Gupta's father-in-law and BJP national vice president Raman Singh had recently claimed that the police's action was politically motivated, and the case would not stand in the court.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)