Latest news with #CBICourt
Hans India
a day ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Obulapuram mining case: Appeals challenging CBI court order admitted
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court single bench of Justice Kunuru Lakshman on Monday admitted criminal appeals filed by Gali Janardhan Reddy and other accused in the Obulapuram Mining Case. He 'reserved' orders on the interim applications filed by the petitioners seeking 'bail'. All the accused – Janardhan Reddy, BV Srinivasa Reddy, V D Rajagopal, IAS (retd), K Mehafus Ali Khan – had filed applications in the main writ appeals, seeking 'bail' by suspending the CBI court order dated May 6 this year. The senior counsel appearing for Gali informed the court that consequent upon the CBI Court had convicting him and other accused to seven years' imprisonment and a fine of each Rs. 10,000. (The Karnataka Assembly by way of a notification dated May 8 withdrew Gali's membership). He pleaded before the judge to hear the application seeking suspension of the conviction order at an early date on the ground that the Election Commission will issue a notification for holding election to the constituency held by Gali. Justice Lakshman agreed to hear the application. All the accused had moved the vacation court in May seeking similar reliefs. However, the court declined to hear the appeals stating there was no urgency. The court adjourned the appeals for further adjudication to August.
Indian Express
01-06-2025
- Indian Express
1993 fake encounter case: 3 former cops sentenced 3-8 yrs of RI with fines, two acquitted
Thirty years after a Phagwara resident was killed in a fake police encounter in 1993, a Special CBI Court in Mohali on Saturday sentenced three former Punjab Police officers to three to eight years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) with fines and acquitted two constables of all charges. Delivering judgment, Special Judge-II Baljinder Singh Sra held Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Karamjit Singh, former Inspector Manjit Singh and former Sub-Inspector Gurmej Singh guilty of the crime and acquitted Constables Kashmir Singh and Harjit Singh of all charges. The court framed charges under sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), read with 342 (wrongful confinement), 364 (kidnapping or abducting in order to murder) and 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) — charges under IPC sections 342 and 364 were applied to certain accused. After a detailed trial, the court sentenced Karamjit Singh (then ASI) to three years of RI and a fine of Rs 50,000 under IPC Section 120-B read with Section 364 and one year of RI under IPC Section 342; Manjit Singh (then Inspector) to eight years of RI and a fine of Rs 50,000 under IPC Section 364, also 5 years of RI and a fine of Rs 50,000 under IPC Section 120-B and one year of RI under IPC Section 342; and, Gurmej Singh (then SI) to eight years of RI and a fine of Rs 50,000 under IPC Section 364, 5 years of RI and a fine of Rs 50,000 under IPC Section 120-B. The court also directed that compensation be paid to the Class-I legal heirs of the deceased, Palwinder Singh, from the fines collected from the convicted officers. Victim Palwinder Singh's daughter Bhupinder Kaur has, however, expressed her 'dissatisfaction' over the verdict. 'The sentence is too lenient given the severity of the crime,' Bhupinder said, adding that she would move the high court, seeking a harsher punishment for the accused persons. Darshan Singh, father of Palwinder Singh, alias Pappu, had filed a criminal writ petition in 1995, alleging that on the morning of March 27, 1993, ASI Karamjit Singh and other unidentified officers from the Rawalpindi police station under Phagwara tehsil in Kapurthala district, forcibly abducted his son from their home in the presence of family members and villagers. Darshan Singh alleged that Palwinder's whereabouts remained unknown thereafter. The petitioner expressed fear that his son was unlawfully detained or possibly killed in custody. Later, an FIR No. 18 dated April 5, 1993, from Sultanpur Lodhi police station surfaced, stating that Palwinder Singh had been killed in a police encounter the same day. Following a Punjab and Haryana High Court order on September 12, 2005, the CBI took over the investigation and re-registered the case. After an extensive probe, a chargesheet was filed under sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 342 (wrongful confinement) and 218 (public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture) of the IPC against the five accused police officers.
Indian Express
04-05-2025
- Indian Express
CBI court awards its inspector 5-yr jail: ‘graft by public servants has reached monsterous stage'
Sentencing a CBI inspector to five years in jail for extorting a 'new Honda City car' from a company in 2016, the special CBI Court of Chandigarh on Saturday said that 'corruption by public servants has reached such monsterous stage that the institutions which have been created for the purpose of serving the public are thwarting the very purpose of the same'. The court added that by virtue of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 'all public servants are warned that the corrupt will have to face serious consequences'. The convict — Ravinder Kumar Singla, a CBI Inspector, was held guilty under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, section 13 (1) (d) (ii) punishable under section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and section 384 (extortion) of Indian Penal Code, by the Court of Alka Malik, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special CBI Court, Chandigarh. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on the convict. The Court has already acquitted accused Paramjit Singh from all charges. As the matter came up for quantum of sentence on Saturday, Ravinder Kumar Singla by virtue of his separate statement reduced to writing urged that he has impeccable record of service except the present case. He is not a previous convict and has the liability to maintain his family including wife, minor children and aged parents, thus praying for a lenient view. Narender Singh, Public Prosecutor for CBI argued that the convict who was an Inspector in CBI has misused his official position to such an extent that he has extorted Honda City car in question from complainant company, which deals in pharmaceuticals. 'His behaviour is a stark reminder of the corrosive influence of corruption and the dangers of unchecked power. Therefore, to uphold the rule of law and ensure that those who abuse their position of trust are held accountable, the convict should be dealt with sternly and he is not entitled to any kind of leniency. In fact, he has undermined the premier institution the Central Bureau of Investigation, which he was serving by indulging in corrupt practices. Therefore, he deserves strict punishment to deter like-minded public servants,' he argued. The CBI Judge on hearing the arguments held that 'It shall be absolutely relevant to mention here that corruption by public servants has reached such monsterous stage that the institutions which have been created for the purpose of serving the public are thwarting the very purpose of the same. Corruption by public servants is in fact paralysing the functioning of the public institutions, thereby hindering the very democratic polity of the State.' Citing different judgements of the Supreme Court, he said, '…the magnitude of corruption in our country has led to economic rest. It is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to this situation. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrest the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. In fact, corruption erodes the fundamental tenets of the rule of law. Corruption is an enemy of the nation and tracking down corrupt public servants and punishing such persons is a necessary mandate of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. By virtue of this act, all public servants are warned that corrupt public servants have to face very serious consequences.' The court said that 'convict while working as inspector in the CBI has indulged in corrupt practices and had extorted a brand new Honda City car in question from the officials of the complainant company. He was daring enough to force them for transfer to its ownership in his name or in his relative's name, Though, at that juncture, the officials of the complainant company refused to succumb to his pressure and initiated the criminal law into motion by filing the instant complaint. However, the convict has shown utmost disregard to the principles of honesty and fair play, which is expected from a public servant. Therefore, he deserves to be punished to deter like minded public servants to curb the menace of corruption.'
