 Early Times Report
Jammu, June 15: A Srinagar court has dismissed the anticipatory bail application of a serving Tehsildar facing corruption allegations, holding that the nature of accusations against a public servant was serious and required thorough investigation.
The order was passed by the Court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar, Dinesh Gupta, in a case arising out of FIR No. 03/2026 registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Srinagar, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The applicant, Maeen Azhar Kakroo, presently posted as Tehsildar Khag in Budgam district, had approached the court seeking pre-arrest bail, contending that he had an unblemished service record and had never faced any criminal, vigilance or departmental proceedings during his career. He further argued that the case was based on official records already in the possession of the investigating agency and, therefore, custodial interrogation was unnecessary.
According to the ACB, the case originated from a complaint alleging that the accused public servant demanded and accepted illegal gratification in the form of a vehicle for facilitating demarcation and restoration of possession of land situated at Gubahar Colony, Hyderpora. During verification, investigators allegedly found material indicating that a second-hand four-wheel-drive vehicle bearing registration number MH03CP-5000 had been arranged by the complainant and purchased through bank transactions.
The prosecution opposed the bail plea, submitting that documentary, electronic and circumstantial evidence collected during the probe prima facie supported the allegations. It was further argued that bank records, official documents and vehicle ownership details corroborated the prosecution case. The ACB also maintained that the accused, being a serving public officer, was in a position to influence witnesses and hamper the investigation.
During the hearing, the Investigating Officer informed the court that custodial interrogation of the accused was required and that the investigation was still in progress.
While examining the matter, the court referred to principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding anticipatory bail and observed that apart from the punishment prescribed for an offence, courts must also consider the seriousness of allegations and their impact on public interest.
The court observed that the allegations involved misuse of official position by a public servant for allegedly obtaining illegal gratification in the form of a vehicle. Holding that the accusations were serious in nature, the court concluded that no case for grant of anticipatory bail was made out.
Consequently, the court dismissed the application and vacated the interim protection that had been granted to the applicant on February 10, 2026. (JNF) |
