news details |
|
|
| CJ dismisses appeal against acquittal of Migrant Draftsman | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Mar 27
Chief Justice KS Radhakrishnan of J&K High Court Jammu wing today dismissed the appeal filed by the Vigilance Organization, aggrieved by the judgment of Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu acquitting the accused Chandan Lal Koul of the charges leveled against him.
According to the Vigilance Organization the accused was working as draftsman in sewerage and drainage Division No 1, Srinagar and after his migration to Jammu in the year 1990, he was attached to the sewerage and drainage division west Jammu for purpose of drawing his leave salary. He was paid an amount of Rs 43,879 from April 1990 to November 1991. The allegation was that during the said period he had taken-up a job with a private company from February 1991 to October 1993 at a monthly pay of Rs 3200 besides other perks, by doing so he had misused his official position and had adopted corrupt and illegal means. A case u/s 5(2) _of Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against the accused and on completion of the investigation charge-sheet was presented. The special Judge Anticorruption considered the evidences produced by the prosecution and came to conclusion that the accused had received Rs 43889 as his leave salary by virtue of Govt order. Special Judge Anticorruption also examined the question as to whether the conduct of the accused in obtaining private employment while he was in Government service would fall within the definition of criminal conduct as defined in PC Act. the Special Judge took the view that violation of section 9 not declaring the assets and not submitting the annual returns by a public servant and acquiring and transferring property without obtaining permission from the prescribed authority, would not constitute criminal misconduct as defined in section 5(2) of PC Act and also carrying on a trade or business during the subsistence of Government employment would not constitute misconduct.
CJ Radhakrishnan, after hearing AAG BS Salathia appearing for the State and Advocates PN Raina and Anshuja appearing for the respondent, and also gone through of the PC Act observed that so far as this case is concerned, it has been found that no offence u/s 5(2) PC Act has been made out, under such circumstances, the Special Judge cannot try the charge leveled against the accused u/s 168 RPC and Court also concur with the view of the Special Judge that there was no application of mind in issuing sanction to prosecute the accused. By now more than 15 years have elapsed and subjecting him to undergo a criminal trial for the offence u/s 168 RPC at this stage would be most un-fair. With these observations this appeal is dismissed, the CJ ordered. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
