Mohali court jails ASI for taking ₹50,000 bribe to release murder accused

ASI Jaswinder Singh, who was serving as SHO of Kotbhai police station, Muktsar, when arrested in August 2016, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act

A Mohali court has sentenced a Punjab Police assistant sub-inspector (ASI) to four-year rigorous imprisonment for demanding and accepting a ₹50,000 bribe to release a murder accused in 2016.

He was sentenced to three-year rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹25,000 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and four years with a fine of ₹50,000 under Section 13 (2). Both sentences will run concurrently. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

ASI Jaswinder Singh, who was serving as SHO of Kotbhai police station, Muktsar, when arrested in August 2016, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

He was sentenced to three-year rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹25,000 under Section 7 and four years with a fine of ₹50,000 under Section 13 (2). Both sentences will run concurrently.

The court acquitted co-accused head constables Kuldeep Singh and Ram Sarup.

As per case files, the ASI had sought the bribe from one Jagga Singh to release his son Kuldeep Singh, arrested for the murder of Sukhpal Kaur. The cop initially demanded ₹2.50 lakh, but later agreed to accept ₹ 50,000 to transfer Kuldeep from police custody to judicial custody.

Acting on a complaint, the Vigilance Bureau had laid a trap on August 12, 2016, and arrested the ASI. A hand-wash test of the ASI turned pink, and the Forensic Science Laboratory report confirmed the presence of phenolphthalein on his hands, directly proving that he had accepted the bribe.

Holding that corruption undermined public service and corroded the social fabric, the court awarded rigorous imprisonment to the cop.

The defence denied the charges and argued that the money was foisted and that documents were fabricated. One defence witness produced service records and departmental inquiry material. The defence also pointed to delays (for example, the FSL sample was sent later) and to a conflicting shadow-witness statement. The accused claimed humiliation and a scuffle during the raid. The court considered these points but found they did not undermine the prosecution’s link evidence and forensic results.

The court held that the prosecution proved the demand, acceptance, and recovery of the tainted money beyond a reasonable doubt.