news details |
|
|
| Court acquits PDD employees from corruption charges | | |
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Mar 8: A court today acquitted two Power Development Department (PDD) employees who were caught red-handed by the Vigilance Organisation Jammu in a trap laid on March 15, 2002.
Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu JR Kotwal acquitted Ashok Kumar then posted Junior Assistant in M&RE Sub Division Samba and Bansi Lal then Lineman Sub-Division Samba as the prosecution has failed to prove that accused Ashok Kumar was involved in demand or acceptance of bribe whereas against accused Bansi Lal Lineman it is proved that he demanded and accepted Rs 2500 from complainant in the Course of trap lead by VOJ, but the evidence led by prosecution failed to prove that he was a public servant at the relevant time.
According to the VOJ case that on March 15, 2002 one Sham Lal lodged a written complaint in which he alleged that Bansi Lal Lineman and Ashok Kumar clerk of electricity dept are demanding bribe Rs 3000 from him on the assurance that his electricity tariff, which has accumulated Rs 4000 would be settled at Rs 3000.
The complainant further alleged that under compulsion he has settled to pay Rs 3000 as bribe to the accused person. On this complaint FIR was registered u/s 5(2) PC Act 2006 and 161 RPC and trap team which was constituted and laid a trap and caught red-handed the accused and bribe money Rs 2500 was recovered from the possession of the accused Bansi Lal, after completion of the investigation challan was presented in the Court.
Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu JR Kotwal in the 62 pages judgment after hearing Advocates RK Modi and SC Bali appearing for the accused and gone though the case filed by VOJ observed that statement recorded during the investigation of the case by the Investigation Officer which is not admissible as evidence.
This information was an important stepping-stone for the Investigation Officer, which should have prompted him to go further and ascertain as on whose role the accused lineman at that time was. This could have been easily done by ascertaining as to whether accused Bansi Lal then Lineman was receiving salary from whom.
It is not understandable as to how IO contended with the receipt of letter only which in any case provided vague information failing to explain as to whether Bansi Lal accused was on the role of the Rural Electric Co-operative society Vijaypur or PDD dept. with these observations Court acquitted both the accused from the charges leveled against them. ---JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
