news details |
|
|
| Revenue official acquitted of corruption charges | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
Jammu, Jan: 12 :- Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu AK Koul today acquitted Lakhimi Chand then Senior Assistant Revenue Record Room Gole-Gujral Jammu who was caught red-handed by the VOJ.
According to the Vigilance case on September 16, 2005 a complaint was lodged in the VOJ by one Naresh Kumar in which it has been alleged that on September 14, 2005 the complainant applied for issuance of Khasra Girdawari in respect of land to Incharge Record Room Naib-Tehsildar who marked the said application to accused senior assistant in his office for issuance of said record. The complainant approached the accused for further follow-up action but he demanded Rs 400 as illegal gratification from him. The complainant lodged a written complaint with the VOJ and VOJ on September 16, 2005 laid a trap and caught red-handed the accused. After completion of investigation of VOJ presented challan in the Court on January 9, 2006.
The court after hearing the parties observed that prosecution witness VK Ganjoo has acted in many capacities in this case. One could not normally find fault with an individual acting in different capacities during the investigation of the case but here the situation is somewhat peculiar in the sense that this witness has remained associated with the trap first and has then conducted the investigation also. This cannot be viewed fairly because this witness has participated in the trap and was a member of the trap team and thereafter he should have desisted from conducting investigation but he is not. Court have not approved this course of action on the part of an individual and referred a judgment in this behalf and said that fact and evidence of the case when evaluated in the light of relevant law, the only fair conclusion that can be drawn is that prosecution has failed to establish a doubt free nexus between accused and guilt. All the facts seem shrouded in mystery and law is settled that convictions cannot be based on inference and conjectures. Right from beginning till end the facts more particularly the material once have remained doubtful and so the benefit of doubt has to be extended to accused. That being so the case fails and challan is dismissed, the accused is acquitted being given the benefit of doubt. JNF
JNF/JANUARY/12/2011/2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
