news details |
|
|
| Ex-JMC official acquitted of graft charges | | Nothing proved against Wattal, SVO tells court | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Feb 11: The Jammu Municipal Corporation (JMC) Joint Commissioner Kiran Wattal, who was booked under Prevention of Corruption Act by State Vigilance Organisation (SVO) in December 2005, has been absolved of all the corruption charges against him by the Court of Special Judge Anti-Corruption.
The court directive came Wednesday after the SVO itself stated that "the investigation of the case against Wattal is closed as not proved".
It took SVO over four years to arrive at the final conclusion that no case of corruption could be worked out against him. During this period, SVO also took the assistance of financial experts to scrutinise the records of his family business transactions which already stood assessed by the income tax department.
Under the instructions of its commissioner, SVO submitted its final report to the court, admitting that the investigation of the case is "concluded as not proved".
After going into the details of the SVO report, special judge anti-corruption, J R Kotwal observed that "on appraisal of record submitted to this court I find no ground for disagreeing with the conclusion arrived at by the investigating agency. The final report is, therefore, accepted. Attachment of property, attached during investigation, whatsoever, stands vacated as per sub section (2) of section 8-E of the Act."
As per the SVO's final report, the income of the accused and his income tax payee wife Veena Wattal and other family members, as also his assets, the investigating agency found that the disproportionate assets possessed by him are valued at - Rs 52,950.
SVO had registered FIR No 19 on December 6, 2005, after a preliminary inquiry into its source information that Wattal, who that time was posted as JMC Joint Commissioner, had amassed huge assets comprising palatial houses, business premises, plots of land and bank deposits disproportionate to his known sources of income. He was thus booked for offence punishable under section 5 (2) read with 5 (1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
However, after SVO dug into the case, it found out that no such case could be made out against the officer as the business concerns, which were attributed to him at the time of the raid, actually belonged to his brothers and other family members, all of whom were income tax payers.
The SVO conducted the raid despite the fact that already a preliminary inquiry conducted by it had shown all these concerns belonging to his brothers and other family members.
Most of these concerns and a house at Karan Nagar were established two to three decades back by family elders.
The raid on his premises was conducted despite the fact that SVO had already carried out a detailed preliminary inquiry into the allegations made by an anonymous complainant. In its letter dated November 13, 2003, in this regard, SVO conveyed to housing and urban development commissioner that "no vigilance case is registered or pending against the officer. Then what prompted the SVO to raid the premises? This is a question which raises doubts on the credibility and functioning of SVO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
