STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Sanjay Dhar (with the charge of Additional Sessions Judge Anticorruption Jammu) on Monday acquitted a Patwari and his accomplice who were arrested by Vigilance Organisation Jammu (VOJ) while accepting bribe to the tune of Rs 5,200 for attesting the mutation, as VOJ failed to prove the case.
According to the VOJ, complainant Ajit Singh on 2nd June, 2009 lodged a written complaint with Police Station VOJ alleging therein that accused Balak Ram Patwari Halqa Korotana Kalan R.S Pura, demanded a sum of Rs. 5,200 as illegal gratification for attestation of mutation of inheritance in his favour pursuant to demise of his father. It was also alleged in the complaint that accused Balak Ram had already taken Rs. 4,800 from the complainant and he was demanding a further sum of Rs. 5,200 from the complainant, who instead of paying the bribe amount to the accused, approached Vigilance Organisation Jammu and narrated details to the then Superintendent of Police VOJ. Upon this complaint, FIR No. 12/2009 for offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with S. 5(2) P.C. Act & S. 161 RPC was registered and a trap was laid on 2nd June, 2009, and during the trap proceedings, it came to the fore that accused Balak Ram demanded an amount of Rs. 5,200 as illegal gratification from the complainant and further directed him to hand over the bribe money to accused Jangi Ram, who was present over there at the relevant time. The complainant, on the instructions of accused Balak Ram, handed over the amount of Rs. 5,200 to accused Jangi Ram, who after counting the same, kept it in left pocket of his pent. The bribe amount of Rs. 5,200 was recovered by the members of trap team from the possession of accused Jangi Ram and the same was seized and after completion of investigation Challan was presented.
Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Sanjay Dhar after hearing Advocate K.S Charak for the accused persons observed that in the absence of any cogent, convincing and reliable evidence to prove the aspects of demand and acceptance of bribe money by the accused, the presumption under Section 4 of Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be raised against the accused in this case and further observed that it is clear that VOJ has not discharged its burden to prove its case against the accused. The charge sheet is, therefore, dismissed and the accused are acquitted of the charges. JNF
