news details |
|
|
| Court rejects pre-arrest bail of IV class CAPD employee in DA case with 20000 costs | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Jan 25: Special Judge Anticorruption Baramulla Amarjeet Singh Langeh rejected the pre-arrest bail application of Mohammad Shafi Rather crorepati IV class Employee in Disproportionate Assets Case.
According to the ACB that a FIR 11/2024 has been registered against the applicant in which 2. Allegations against petitioner are that he has acquired immovable properties worth crores of rupees which are disproportionate to his known source of income as Kandaman, a class IV employee in Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department. Alleged disproportionate assets, as per report of respondent - police station comprise of, two big houses at Wanigam Bala, Pattan; 12 kanals of land at Wanigam; land in Bhat Colony & Poshwan, Pattan; house at Umerabad, Srinagar; another patch of 10 kanals of land at Ritumsar, Singhpora; another patch of land comprising of 12 kanals at Gadkul, Singhpora and other properties as mentioned in para 1 of the report of respondent - police station. During investigation, it came to fore that petitioner has raised assets to the tune of Rupees Four crores Thirty Three Lacs & Fifty Four Thousand, (433.54 lacs) and has also incurred expenditure of Rupees One Crore Eleven Lacs & Forty Six Thousand, (111.46 lacs) against income of Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs and Twenty Two Thousand, (29.22 lacs), which he received during check period and his disproportionate assets are more than 1765%, etc, etc.
Special Judge Anticorruption Baramulla Amarjeet Singh Langeh after hearing both the sides observed that it is pertinent to point out that instant anticipatory bail application that petitioner has moved here in, mentions in para 3 that petitioner has not approached to any other court in the present cause except before this court by way of instant application. Clearly therefore, petitioner has concealed the factum of pendency of anticipatory bail application as aforesaid before High Court which is said to have been listed for 17.03.2025. Curiously enough, learned counsel for petitioner in presence of petitioner today files copy of application, wherein he seeks withdrawal of aforesaid anticipatory bail application before High Court and has thus only added another dimension to the act of petitioner instead of taking sensible purging measures.
It needs no reiteration that suppression of truth is equivalent to the expression of falsehood and that concealing material facts in a lis, like one in hand, before court of law is a reprehensible form of manipulation and misrepresentation. Petitioner, by concealing the factum of pendency of an earlier anticipatory bail before High Court - has only played fraud upon this court having the propensity to affect the administration of justice. This conduct alone disentitles petitioner from being heard on merits in the matter. Further, the conduct of petitioner is visibly aligned with the notion that he could mislead court with impunity in complete disregard for the process of law. I say no more at this stage.
Court ordered that this application is dismissed as having been fraudulently filed with costs of Rs. 20,000/- to be paid and deposited by petitioner with Secretary, District Legal Services Authority - Baramulla within seven days from today positively, failing which appropriate orders including process for initiation of contempt against petitioner be initiated. This is made loud and clear to petitioner here and now.
—JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
