STATE TIMES NEWS
SRINAGAR: Special Judge Anti-Corruption Srinagar framed charges against Shah Skinder Khan, Enforcement Officer LAWDA in an illegal construction case.
According to ACB, the accused, while his posting as Enforcement Officer LAWDA from February 3, 2014 to May 1, 2015, in complete disregard to his official position, pursuant to conspiracy with accused No 2, permitted him to raise illegal construction of a double-storey concrete tin roofed house with plinth 3934 Sq ft at Ishber Nishat without requisite permission from competent authority, to bestow undue benefit on him (accused No 2) & for his personal gain. He further argued that accused No. 1 slept over information of his subordinate enforcement staff with regard to illegal construction w.e.f., September 20, 2014 to December 31, 2015. He further argued that the accused No. 1 being criminally silent about matter compelled Supervisor concerned to directly inform the then VC LAWDA, who took cognizance and ordered demolition on September 27-28, 2014. It was also argument of Special PP that statement of witnesses recorded during investigation prima facie leads to concrete conclusion that accused No. 1 paved way for aforementioned illegal construction by accused No. 2 in furtherance of criminal conspiracy for symbiotic interest, as such offences Under Sections 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of JK Prevention of corruption Act read with Section 120-B of RPC are established against accused. It was also the argument of learned PP that there is not the suspicion but definite evidence that has come to fore during investigation and same is sufficient for charging accused for the offences as indicated in the FIR. He further argued that full trial in the case after charging accused is the need of hour so as to lead to definite conclusion and prayed for charging accused under Section 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of PC Act & Section 120-B.
Special Judge Anti-Corruption Srinagar, R N Wattal after hearing both sides, observed that it is crystal clear that evidence collected against accused during investigation leads to definite conclusion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused have committed the offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of P. C. Act & Section 120-B of RPC as indicated in the FIR. The accused No. 1 present in court is charged for the commission of the offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of P. C. Act & Section 120-B of RPC accordingly. The contents of charge were read over and explained to him but he denied to have committed aforementioned offences and prayed for trial.