news details |
|
|
| HC sets-aside conviction of Revneue Official in trap case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Dec 13: Justice Rajnesh oswal of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set-aside the conviction awarded by the Additional Special Judge, Anti-corruption, Srinagar in case titled "State Vs. Mohammad Abdullah Geelani", arising out of FIR No. 24/2006 of P.S VOK is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
According to the prosecution case that on 28.06.2006, an application was submitted by the complainant Mansoor Ahmed @ Mashooq before the S.S.P, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, (for short 'the VOK') stating there in that he had gone to Tehsil Office, Handwara for the attestation of mutation of the land owned and possessed by the appellant who was posted there as Nazir/Jr. Assistant demanded an amount of t10,000/- from him. He was a poor man and was making his both ends meet with difficulty and as such, after persuasions, the appellant had asked him to bring t 5,000/ that day. As he was against paying the bribe and had managed t5,000/ with great difficulty, therefore, he approached the VOK for taking action against the appellant. On receipt of this application, FIR No. 24/2006 u/s 5(2) of J&K PC Act read with section 161 RPC was registered. After completion of investigation challan was presented and Trial Court sentenced the appellant to rigours imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs 10,000/- for commission of offence u/s 5(2) r/w 5 (1) (d) of J&K PC Act and further two years rigorous imprisonment for commission of offence under section 161 RPC. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has been ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal after hearing both the sides observed that the whole case of the prosecution is shrouded with mystery and there are un-explained gaps in the prosecution story, the benefit of which is required be given to the appellant. There is no doubt that the allegations against the appellant are in respect of commission of offence against the society but the facts established by the prosecution merely raises a suspicion on the appellant in respect of commission of offence without establishing his guilt conclusively, but the accused cannot be convicted on suspicion alone, how strong it may be.
The appellant deserves to be granted the benefit of doubt. In view of what has been considered and discussed above, the judgment dated 29.08.2014 passed by the Court of learned Additional Special Judge, Anti-corruption, Srinagar in case titled "State Vs. Mohammad Abdullah Geelani", arising out of FIR No. 24/2006 of P.S VOK is not sustainable in the eyes of law and as such, the same is set aside. The appellant is acquitted, and the challan is dismissed. The appellant is on bail. His bail and personal bonds are discharged.
—JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
