E-Paper
Chandigarh: SDM office clerk who took ₹2,000 bribe awarded 5-year rigorous imprisonment
The clerk, Jasbir Singh, was arrested by CBI on June 3, 2015, after being caught red-handed while accepting the bribe from the complainant
A Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Monday sentenced a clerk at the SDM (South) office to four-year rigorous imprisonment for accepting a ₹2,000 bribe in 2015.
The court of special CBI judge Jagjit Singh also imposed a ₹8,000 fine on the convict, Jasbir Singh.
The clerk was arrested on June 3, 2015, after being caught red-handed while accepting the bribe. As per the complainant, Jitender, a case under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal procedure (CrPC) was pending against him. The accused, who was the reader of the SDM, introduced himself as Ramesh, which the victim later found out was a fake name, and demanded the bribe to dispose of the matter.
During their subsequent meeting on June 3, 2015, the CBI laid a trap and caught Jasbir red-handed while accepting the bribe, Subsequently, a case under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered at the CBI police station in Chandigarh.
During trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses to establish the accused’s guilt. The defence counsel examined one defence witness. But the court observed that the prosecution had been able to prove the guilt beyond shadow of reasonable doubt and convicted the accused.
While the quantum of sentence was being pronounced on Monday, the convict prayed for leniency, saying he had no past criminal record. He also has to take care of his widowed mother, who is suffering from hypertension, migraine and other old-age ailments, along with his wife and two minor children. He also submitted that he had already been facing trial for seven years.
However, the prosecution argued that stringent punishment should be awarded, as he indulged in the offence despite knowing the repercussions.
Observing that the convict deserved no leniency, the court said the convict was working on contract basis and was not even sure whether he will be continuing on the said post, but even that did not deter him from indulging in corrupt practices.
“He was aware that the matter of the complainant will finish on its own after completion of certain period, but he was trying to befool the complainant, who was not aware of the normal process. The convict was trying to make money out of it by demanding bribe. How many persons he has befooled in such a manner can presently not be known,” the court remarked.
“The convict was required to stay sincere so that he would have formed a good reputation on the post he was working...but he was doing otherwise, and proliferation of corrupt public servants could garner momentum to cripple the social order if such men are allowed to continue to manage and operate public institutions,” the court further observed, while sentencing the accused.
