IAS Officer Abhishek Prakash Named Accused in Solar Company Bribery Case; SIT to Question Him Soon

Lucknow: The troubles of suspended IAS officer Abhishek Prakash have escalated in connection with a bribery case involving SAEL Solar Power Company. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) has named the former Invest UP CEO Abhishek Prakash as an accused for allegedly demanding a bribe to approve the company’s project. The action follows evidence and witness statements collected during the investigation.

The company representative, Vishwajeet Das, had filed an FIR at Gomtinagar police station on 20 March 2025, alleging that a five percent bribe was demanded for project approval.

According to the FIR, the company had applied to Invest UP for projects related to solar cells and solar energy equipment in Uttar Pradesh. A senior official had sent a person named Nikant Jain as a contact point. Nikant Jain allegedly demanded a five percent bribe to approve the project, and the company’s file was stalled when the bribe was not paid. Following this, the Chief Minister had suspended Abhishek Prakash, while Nikant Jain was arrested and sent to jail.

The SIT, formed to investigate the matter, includes ASP Vikas Chandra Tripathi of Barabanki, ACP Vinay Dwivedi of Vibhutikhand, and Inspector Alok Rao.

SIT Seeks Permission from Appointments Department
During the investigation, Abhishek Prakash’s name surfaced as the senior official involved. The SIT has requested permission from the Appointments Department to record his statement. Once approval is received, his statement will be taken, and further action will follow. Sources indicate that Nikant Jain, during SIT questioning, identified Abhishek Prakash as the senior official mentioned in the FIR. Several other pieces of evidence also corroborated their contact, leading the SIT to name Prakash as an accused.

Vigilance Inquiry Also Underway
A vigilance investigation against Abhishek Prakash is also ongoing. The SIT has already filed a chargesheet against Nikant Jain, and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is conducting its probe. Meanwhile, the complainant has submitted an affidavit in court stating that the allegations they made were false, raising questions about possible coercion. However, the investigation has advanced significantly.

Nikant Jain’s statements naming Abhishek Prakash have become a key component of the SIT’s probe, pointing to the IAS officer’s involvement. The SIT has acted based on evidence and statements, ensuring that sufficient grounds exist before naming Prakash as an accused and that the investigation remains impartial.