news details |
|
|
| Court declares 14 accused as proclaimed offenders | | BOPEE Scam | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Mar 26: A local court here has declared 14 absconding accused persons as proclaimed offenders. The accused include students and parents.
The Special Anti-Corruption Court Judge Kashmir M L Manhas issued the written proclamation after Crime Branch moved a motion to this effect.
"After taking the evidence on record in terms of the statements of executing agency on oath, this court has reason to believe that 14 accused against whom general warrants of arrest under section 512 CrPC have been issued, have absconded or are concealing themselves, so warrants issued against them could not be executed," the Court observed.
"A written proclamation is issued/published requiring the absconding accused persons to appear before this court on or before April 24, 2014," the court said.
The court also ordered that a copy of the proclamation shall be affixed conspicuously in the area in which the absconders ordinarily reside as well as the home of the absconder and published in local dailies through Director Information State.
The accused who are avoiding arrest are Mohammad Amin Ganie of Chee Anantnag, Mir Wajid Majeed, Miss Mir Danish Majeed of Kokernag, Abdul Majeed Mir of Kokernag, Fida Hussain Lone of Bijbhera, Ruhail Ahmad Mir, Mohammad Amin Mir of Hyderpora Srinagar, Hilal Ahmad Shokli of Mattan Chowk Anantnag, Imtiyaz-ul-Hussain Shah, Altaf Hussain Shah of Kishtwar, Miss Arooj Mushtaq, of KP Road Anantnag and Arooj's father Mushtaq Ahmad Dar son of Sonaullah Dar.
The J&K High Court had last week directed the Crime Branch to take tough action against those evading arrest in the case.
Hearing a suo-moto PIL, a division bench comprising of Chief Justice M M Kumar and Justice Hasnain Massodi had asked the Crime Branch for taking the action after Advocate General informed it that despite issuing proceedings against them under section 512 CrPC the accused have intentionally gone into hiding to scuttle the due process of law and also thwart the implementation of the order passed by High Court. The Division Bench had said there was no reason for the Crime Branch not to make use of tools like proclamation and attachment of property provided under Sections 87 & 88 Cr.PC.
On March 1, the Crime Branch had filed supplementary chargesheet against 19 accused in CET--2012 paper leak scam. This chargesheet against 19 accused included six students and nine parents of students who allegedly benefited out of the paper leak scam in 2012.
The 19 accused against whom the supplementary charge sheet was filed also included Mushtaq Ahmad Baqaal, alias Pir the former Chairman BOPEE, Sajad Ahmad and Haroon.
The Crime Branch later filed a supplementary chargesheet against three more students in a juvenile court here. On February 22, the anti corruption court here had rejected bail applications of all the accused including Mushtaq Pir, former chairman BOPEE so far arrested in the matter.
On February 17, in compliance to the High Court directions, the BOPEE cancelled admissions of 12 students who had allegedly purchased papers prior to the conduct of CET in 2012. The admissions of the 12 beneficiary students were cancelled as their names surface in the Crime Branch list of students who secured admissions in government medical college here after purchasing the CET question papers two years ago.
Six of them are presently lodged in Central Jail here while fresh arrest warrants have been issued against three others--two of them girls--by the Court. The three remaining beneficiaries are minors (below 18-years of age) and they have been lodged in juvenile home, sources in crime branch had said. The High Court had earlier censured BOPEE for its 'snail pace' shown in prerequisite legal formalities for cancellation of admissions of tainted candidates. The court had said that nobody would be allowed to reap fruits of CET-2012 paper leak scam. Since the High Court is scheduled to hear the matter on Tuesday, the BOPEE filed its status report informing the court about cancellation of admissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
