news details |
|
|
| Court frames corruption charges against XEn, AO | | |  Early Times Report
Jammu, Nov 27: Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Haq Nawaz Zargar framed charges against Rajinder Kumar Executive Engineer and Mohammad Farooq Assistant Accounts Officer who were booked by the VOJ (Now ACB) in trap case. According to the case that the accused persons are involved and trapped in consequence to the written complaint filed by the complainant on 20-03-2020 mentioning therein that his firm had completed some work and payment of Rs 29,97000/- was released by XEn Construction Div-IV, SSA/RMSA, Jammu. His firm completed some more work worth Rs 15 lacs but the payment was withheld and not being released by XEn. On enquiry he was told by accused No. 01 to give 2% and 1.5% of share and demanded Rs 45,000/- for them. A trap team was constituted to lay trap and necessary procedure was followed. The trap team went on the spot. Mohammad Farooq Assistant Accounts Officer demanded Rs 45,000/- for himself and for XEn and same was paid to Mohammad Farooq Assistant Accounts Officer by the complainant in presence of shadow witness as illegal gratification and the bribed money was recovered by trap team from the office table of Mohammad Farooq Assistant Accounts Officer.
Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Haq Nawaz Zargar after hearing APP MA Almansoor for the ACB whereas Sr. Adv Sunil Sethi for the XEn and Adv KS Charak for the Mohammad Farooq observed that there is enough material on record to show prima facie that both the accused persons had abused their official position by demanding and accepting bribe money, accused No. 01 had demanded and accepted Rs 45000/- as illegal gratification from the complainant on his own behalf as well as on behalf of accused No. 02 for favouring the complainant in order to clear his CC-2 bill which otherwise was their duty under law and, as such, are liable for commission of offences punishable U/Sec 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act r/w PC (amendment) of 2018 Sec 120-B IPC. They are, therefore, ordered to be charged accordingly. The charge against both of them stands read over and explained to them in open court. Both the accused plead not guilty and claimed to be tried. Their plea has been recorded. The prosecution, is therefore, called upon to substantiate the charge by leading evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
