news details |
|
|
| Accused facing trial for allowing mass-copying in examination acquitted | | VOJ miserably fails to prove its case | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Mar 1
Special Judge, Anticorruption, Jammu Mr. Kartar Singh acquitted Charan Dass the then Superintendent, Prem Kumar the then Deputy Superintendent and Purshtom Lal Sharma, the then Supervisor of 12th class bi-annual examination at center No 135 Talab-Tillo Jammu as the VOJ has miserably failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt.
According to the VOJ one Sandeep Kumar lodged a written complaint with the Organization alleging therein that he was appearing in bi-annual of 12 class of J&K Board of School Education at centre No 135 Talab-Tllo Jammu and the Superintendent of centre Charan Dass, in connivance with Deputy Superintendent Prem Kumar and Supervisor Purshtom Lal Sharma demanded money from the candidates appearing in the examination for allowing them to copy in the examination. During his first paper Purshtom Lal Sharma demanded Rs 16000 and the deal settled was on Rs 9000 after consulting Superintendent. Deputy Superintendent initially accepted Rs 4500 from him on second paper. On October 5, 2001, Purshtom Sharma asked him to pay the remaining amount failing which he would not allow him to sit in the examination and took him to Superintendent Charan Dass and told him that this candidate was not giving the remaining amount as already fixed. On this Charan Dass told him to bring the money on next paper and allowed him to sit in the examination. The complainant further stated that he was going to appear in a paper for which he was carrying Rs 4500 to be paid to Purshtom Lal Sharma for Superintendent and his Deputy. On this complaint, case was registered and a trap team arrested Purshtom Lal on spot. During sustained interrogation of the accused Purshtom Lal, he made statement disclosing the place where the bribe amount has been concealed which was recovered and after completion of the case challan was presented in the court of law.
Special Judge Anticorruption, after hearing both sides and going through the case and statements of witnesses, observed that mere recovery of tainted amount, the prosecution of the accused is not sufficient to convict the accused unless the other ingredients of demand and acceptance of bribe are not proved. The lodging of the FIR in this case is also doubtful. The complainant who was the author of the complaint which was lodged by him with VOJ has not supported the prosecution story and has stated that he lodged the complaint in the VOJ on the suggestion of one Tinku. However, in the cross-examination, he has denied to have lodged any complaint in the VOJ and it was lodged when the tainted amount was recovered from the village on Akhnoor road. In view of the statement of the complainant, the VOJ has miserably failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt and therefore they are acquitted of the charges framed against them. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
