A special court on Monday sentenced a clerk in the office of the UT deputy conservator of forests (DCF) to four years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) for accepting ₹10,000 as bribe.
Convict Amritpal Singh, a resident of Sector 23, was posted as a junior assistant when he took bribe from complainant Kalyan Singh, a timber trader, for not taking action against him for cutting trees in Khuda Ali Sher in 2015.
The FIR was registered at the vigilance police station on June 29, 2015 under the Prevention of Corruption Act. According to the prosecution, the accused had demanded ₹1 lakh from the complainant while threatening him with action for allegedly cutting trees without permission. The amount was later negotiated to ₹70,000 or ₹80,000, and a sum of ₹10,000 was agreed to be paid while a trap was set up by the vigilance officials, according to the complaint.
The court observed that the tainted currency notes were recovered from the accused at the spot and chemical tests confirmed that he had touched them, supporting the prosecution’s case of acceptance of bribe. The prosecution relied on the testimony of 24 witnesses, including the complainant, corroborated by the shadow witness and trap team members, along with recorded conversations and forensic evidence. The court held that these established both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the anti-corruption law.
Rejecting the defence’s arguments of false implication and procedural lapses, the court observed that minor inconsistencies in witness testimonies did not undermine the core prosecution case.
The court observed that the prosecution was able to establish the guilt of Singh under Sections 5 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act beyond reasonable doubt.
Seeking leniency, the convict prayed that he has an aged father, a wife and children who are dependent on him. Special Judge Harpreet Kaur observed, “The offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act are against the society and affect its entire moral, social and economic fabric. Any kind of leniency shown in absence of any special circumstances will send a wrong signal to the society at large.”
The court observed that the Punjab and Haryana high court, in a case — Sukhwinder Singh Patwari vs State of Punjab, 2007 — held that the corruption at any level, by any person, of any magnitude is condemnable and cannot be ignored by the courts. No leniency is required to be shown in proved cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act. No popular or sympathetic approach is needed in such cases, it mentioned.
Further, in the case of Madhukar Bhaskarrao vs State of Maharashtra, 2001 it was held that the long pendency of the case was also no ground for leniency in sentence.
For offences under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, he was sentenced to three years of RI and fined ₹10,000 while for offences under Section 13(2), he was sentenced to four years and fined ₹20,000. Both the sentences will run concurrently.
www.hindustantimes.com
#Forest #dept #clerk #4yr #jail #bribery #Chandigarh
