news details |
|
|
| Court acquits then Custodian, clerk after 18 yrs investigation, trial | | Special Judge takes serious note of several loopholes in Vigilance investigation | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Feb 04- Taking serious note of the investigation which has been far being objective and fair and stretching over 18 years, the Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu BL Bhat today acquitted the then Custodian Evacuee Property Jammu Haji Abdul Majid and the then clerk Abdul Majid, who were facing investigation and trial from 1990, and called for introspection on the part of those at the helm of affairs in Vigilance Organization to plug loopholes and ensuring foolproof investigation.
The Special Judge Anticorruption, after hearing both the sides, took serious note of the investigating agency and said that the evidence produced by the prosecution with regard to demand and acceptance of bribe money by accused on the three occasions fails to inspire confidence. In the contest of warrant of eviction against complainant in regard to the portion of house previously in occupation of Lassa Koul, the allegations of bribe emanating from complainant smack of concoction. This conclusion is re-enforced by the fact that the complainant did not make any allegation of corruption against the accused in the revision petition filed before Special Tribunal. The conduct of then Custodian in initiating disciplinary proceedings against Abdul Rashid Bashir Ahmed Shah and imposing fine of Rs 500 on accused Abdul Majid then clerk for negligence in issuing receipt and committing misconduct with issuance of warrant of eviction against complainant is incompatible with criminal design and eloquently speaks of bonafdies on the part of then Custodian Haji Abdul Majid. This renders the occasion of bribery improbable, the Vigilance has failed to examine Lassa and no explanation has been forthcoming from his non-examination. Lassa Koul being in occupation of a portion of EP house through Estate Department said to have issued NOC and surrendered possession to complainant after verifying the fact of allotment was the most material witness for prosecution. Same is the case with Investigating Officer who had to explain facts regarding some original documents including the application of complainant bearing endorsement of Revenue Minister and also shade light on the manner of conduct of investigation. Failure on the part of prosecution to produce the material witnesses at the trial not only raises an inference against prosecution in terms of illustration appended to section 114 of Evidence Act but also casts serious aspiration on the prosecution version.
While deciding the case, the Special Judge Anticorruption took serious note and said that investigation has been far from being objective and fair. It is a travesty of justice that accused Haji Abdul Majid then Custodian Jammu, who appears to have been hoodwinked by his own staff by manipulating fake agreement disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent officials imposing penalty under service rule on then clerk Abdul Majid had to suffer the agony of a protracted trial. This cause for introspection on the part of those at the helm of affairs in Vigilance Organization to plug loopholes and ensure foolproof investigation, it is hoped that in future the prosecution case will not be left to survive upon testimony of an accomplice unless such accomplice terms out to be an approver. With these observations Court acquitted the accused persons from the charges leveled against them as the Vigilance Organization miserably failed to bring home of the accused. JNF
Vigilance Organization Jammu had registered case on the basis of finding of then Member J&K Special Tribunal CB Budgujjar in revision proceedings titled Ranjit Singh Vs Custodian EP Jammu which was decided on February 21, 1990. The complainant Ranjit Singh had alleged in the revision petition that a portion of EP House situated at Mohalla Jatkatian Jammu had been allotted to the father of the complainant while the remaining portion of the house was allotted to Estates Department, which was leased to one Lassa Koul, subsequently Lassa Koul vacated his portion, the same was also allotted to complainant on monthly rent of Rs 80.
Member Special Tribunal while deciding the case had found grave illegalities committed by then Custodian and had also observed that the Custodian had devised a method to escape from serious consequence by initiating a departmental enquiry against accused No 2 Abdul Majid then clerk in which a meager sum of Rs 500 was imposed as penalty for serious act of misconduct like cheating and forgery. Allegedly this was done with the evil design of keeping the graft charge under wraps. Prima-facie it was found that allotment of one room and a kitchen to complainant was illegal as the same had already been allotted to Estates Department. This was down to confer undue benefit upon him and accused clerk obtained illegal gratification of Rs 21000 in deal. After completion of the investigation challan was presented in the Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
