IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.
Gurcharan Jaidka – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M NO. 45041 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 17-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of alleged corruption and bribes (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. defense and prosecution arguments regarding involvement (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. consideration of custody and prior record (Para 6) |
| 4. granting bail and relevant offences (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. administrative directive on case files (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
This order shall dispose off the above mentioned two petitions filed on behalf of Gurcharan Jaidka and Dharminderpal @ Bunty seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against them vide FIR No. 19 dated 18.8.2022 under Sections 7 , 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in the year 2018) and Sections 420 , 465, 467, 468, 471/120-B IPC at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Patiala, District Patiala.
2. The FIR was lodged pursuant to receipt of secret information by DSP Parminder Singh, Vigilance Bureau Unit, Sangrur on 18.8.2022 to the effect that Ravinder Singh Gill, Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Sangrur and Mohinder Pal, Motor Vehicle Inspector (MVI) had been 'passing' vehicles without physical inspection of such vehicles, though as per rules a vehicle could be passed only after physical verification. The information was further to the effect that the said officials had fixed bribe of Rs. 2,800/- for passing a commercial vehicle less than eight years old, for two years and Rs.1,800/- for passing a vehicle more than eight years old, for one year and Rs. 1,000/- for a small commercial vehicle. It is alleged that about 2400- 2500 vehicles were being passed in one month and as such, they were collecting a bribe amount of Rs. 35-40 lacs per month through various agents namely Dharminderpal, Deshmukh Goyal, Pawan Kumar, Jagjit Singh, Arhoit Garg, Neetu Walia, Nimma, Ajaypal Goyal, Amzad Khan and that the bribe amount was being taken by Gurcharan Singh Jaidka, Clerk, Jagsir Singh, Data Entry Operator and Sukhwinder Singh @ Lovepreet @ Sukhi. It is further alleged that the share in the bribe was also being taken by Sanjeev Kumar and Satnam Singh, who were working with RTA, Sangrur privately through Dharminderpal @ Bunti. The information was further to the effect that on the given day Dharminderpal @ Bunti had collected bribe from different agents and had come to the office of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Sangrur for getting files passed.
3. Pursuant to receipt of said information, a raid was conducted by the police party at the office of MVI, Sangrur situated in PRTC Workshop, Sangrur on 18.8.2022 and the record at the entry gate was checked and the security personnel Gurpreet Singh made a statement that no private commercial vehicle apart from the official buses had entered in the Workshop for the purpose of inspection and that no private commercial vehicle was seen coming inside the Workshop since the last several days. The officials of the Vigilance Bureau, upon entering the office of the MVI, found Dharminderpal @ Bunti, Jagsir Singh, Date Entry Operator and Gurcharan Singh Jaidka, Clerk who were interrogated by the police. During interrogation, they disclosed details of accused and the modus-operandi and also got recovered incriminating documentary evidence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case and that no offence can be attributed to them and it is the co-accused Mohinder Pal, Motor Vehicle Inspector who had been issuing inspection certificates without physically inspecting the vehicles and the petitioners were merely processing the files which were put up to them and have no role whatsoever in the matter regarding physical inspection of the vehicles.
5. Opposing the petitions, the learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioners were hand-in-gloves with the other co-accused including the Motor Vehicle Inspector - Mohinder Pal and were very well aware about the scam of issuance of inspection certificates without physical inspections, as has specifically been admitted by them
Grant of bail based on completion of investigation and delay in trial due to awaited prosecution sanction for co-accused.
Conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act requires concrete evidence linking the accused's possession of money to an intent to bribe specific public officials, not mere suspicion.
The completion of investigation, absence of recovery, and the likelihood of trial taking time were key factors considered by the court in granting bail to the petitioners.
The court considered the petitioner's prolonged detention, retraction of statements by key witnesses, and the likelihood of trial delay as grounds for granting bail.
The court considered the period of detention, the petitioners' clean record, and the likelihood of a prolonged trial in deciding to grant bail, emphasizing the principle of proportionality in detenti....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.