Bribe demand by University official: Anti-Corruption Court rejects closure report of VOJ, directs carrying out probe

STATE TIMES NEWS

JAMMU: Special Judge Anti-Corruption Jammu Tahir Khurshid Raina rejected the closure report of Vigilance Organization Jammu (now ACB) in FIR No. 04/2007 Police Station VOJ, for offences under sections 5(2) PC Act 2006 BK read with Sec 161 RPC. Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Tahir Khurshid Raina while rejecting the closure report, directed SSP, Vigilance Organization, Jammu, (now ACB – Jammu) to go for further investigation into the case and submit the report within two months.
While rejecting the closure report, Court observed that Vigilance Organization, Jammu (VOJ) presented a closure report in terms of Sec. 173(3) CrPC in case FIR No. 04/2007 Police Station, VOJ titled State Vs Dr Falendra K. Sudan. As per the said report prepared by SSP VOJ, Jammu, the case was ‘not proved’ against the accused. This court, while concurring with the findings of the VOJ, accepted the closure report and ordered the case to be closed as ‘not proved’, as recorded in the order of this court dated 17-05-2008. Feeling aggrieved of this order, the complainant in the case challenged the same before the High Court at Jammu. Court further observed that pursuant to the said direction of the High Court, the complainant was put on notice to appear before this court in the case at hand. Finally, she appeared before the court on 03-07-2022 and her statement with regard to the closure report was recorded. In her statement so recorded she has once again reiterated her stand and revealed at length all those facts whereby she was demanded Rs. 20,000 by her supervisor, the accused herein, for meeting the expenses of visit of the external expert for conducting her viva and also to present gift to him as stated by the accused to her as a part of tradition in University of Jammu to be followed. However, there was no such rule or written order of the university in this regard. That as she belonged to financially low profile family, it was difficult for her to arrange the entire amount instantly. Therefore, she requested the accused to take Rs. 5000 as first installment and rest of Rs 15,000 to be paid well before the viva. That he agreed to the same. That she brought this matter in the notice of the Vigilance Organization, Jammu, which gave her a diary containing audio recorder for recording this whole deal wherein the accused agreed to take first installment of Rs. 5000. She did the same and got the whole conversation recorded between him and her. Thereafter, as per the deal she carried the said money to the office chamber of the accused and kept the same on the office table. However, as her visit was pre-planned by the VOJ, so trap team of VOJ was very much there to catch hold of the accused red handed. By the time, team went inside Chamber of accused, he fell on the feet of complainant, started weeping and tendered an apology. Then they both were separately taken to the Vigilance Office where she also handed over CD of recorded voice to the VO. That thereafter her signatures were taken on 2-3 blank papers. In the meanwhile the university authorities also constituted the committee in context of conducting an enquiry in this regard. However, on asking as to why she did not present said documents to the IO, she stated that for 1-2 times she went to the VOJ where she was told that it was a long drawn process and she would be called when required. Later on the accused, along with his friend Prof Jasbir Singh harassed her a lot in her pursuit of Ph.d and finally they managed the closure of this case by the VOJ. That she is not satisfied with the investigation done in the case.
Special Judge Anti-Corruption Jammu Tahir Khurshid Raina observed that a very crucial piece of evidence, which is the part of the charge sheet is CD, based on the alleged recorded voice of the accused. It is alleged by the complainant that it contains pre-trap conversation between her and the accused, wherein he is demanding the said money for bearing expenses of the visit of expert for conducting viva of the complainant. Fact remains that when this recording was made by the very instrument provided by the VOJ itself to the complainant, then why the IO ignored the same and did not get its veracity tested by the FSL. It was an important piece of evidence which stands ignored by the IO in formulating his opinion in the case. Court observed that fact remains that the court has not to act as the post office of the VOJ to treat their every word as a gospel truth. Though there is a symbolic band on the eyes of goddess of justice, but judge presiding over the court is not blind. People have reposed their full faith in the courts as neutral institutions of administration of justice and courts have to live up to this faith to their fullest. However, this court has to uphold its sanctity, majesty, faith, uprightness et al, purely and squarely by resorting to the due process of law and justice, unaffected and un-influenced of any personal whim and wish of the judge. Court did not find itself in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the SSP, VOJ in the instant closure report and as put earlier, the demand or acceptance of the money by the accused should have been appreciated by the IO as put in the foregoing paras. For that to acknowledge in its true perspective, the best piece of evidence to corroborate this fact was the CD which was given to VOJ by the complainant. Had it been considered and subjected to scientific test, probably the conclusion drawn might have been different. With these observations, Court rejected the closure report and returned to the SSP, Vigilance Organization, Jammu, (now ACB – Jammu) with a direction to go for further investigation into the case and submit the report within two months.