news details |
|
|
| Court Acquits AAO from corruption charges | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
Jammu, October-05 (JNF):- Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Pawan Dev Kotwal acquitted Yash Pal then Assistant Accounts Officer PHE City Division Jammu who was caught red-handed by the VOJ while accepting Rs 2000/- as bribe from the complainant.
According to the Vigilance case on March 13, 2006 complainant Buta Mal lodged a verbal report with the VOJ alleging that he is supplier of Hardware Goods and running a Hardware Shop that in the year 2005-2006, he had supplied GI, CI and lead material to the PHE City Division No 1 Jammu and submitted his bill 40000/50000, in this connection he met the AAO for releasing payment but AAO demanded and received Rs 2000/- as bribe on March 11, 2006 which he had paid to him under compulsion. That on March 13, 2006 AAO again demanded Rs 2000/- as illegal gratification for releasing the payment, on this complaint VOJ registered and constituted a trap and team and laid and caught red-handed the accused. After completion of investigation challan was presented in the Court.
While acquitting the accused from the charges of corruption Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Pawan Dev Kotwal observed that very important aspect making the prosecution case improvable and defence provable is the amount of payment due to the complainant and bribe amount. Though complainant in his complaint mentioned amount of Rs 40-50 thousand due to him but without any details, similarly he testified that some bills other than five bills seized by VOJ are pending, but they were still under process at that time. Neither complainant furnished details of those bills, nor investigating officer investigated this fact. On the other hand maximum amount of the seized bills for passing of which the bribe is alleged demanded and accepted by the accused is 3765/-, it does not appeal to any reasoning that either a public servant would demand amount more than due to the complainant or complainant would pay bribe more than amount due to him. In other words neither accused is accepted to demand and accept an amount of Rs 4000/- nor the complainant can be believed to have paid such amount for passing bills for an amount of Rs 3765/-. There is a passing remark in the evidence of complainant that amount was slashed and after receipt of bribe money, accused enhanced the amount in the bills. It is true that there are cuttings in the bills and parties have made in consistent claims one of the defence of the accused is that bills were not being checked as they bear cutting whereas complainant would say that cutting was cured after receipt of bribe money by the accused. Whatever may be the reason of cutting maximum amount shown in the five bills does not exceed Rs 3765/- and no sane person would be believe transaction of Rs 4000/- for release of this amount. With these observations Court acquitted the Assistant Account Officer PHE Division I by giving him benefit of doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
