Ludhiana, September 27
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed further proceedings in the infamous ‘‘police pay-off case’’ involving 14 police officials allegedly involved in taking bribe from two lottery dealers. The cops had allegedly been ‘‘exposed’’ in a video CD.
This fact came to light today when the case came up for hearing in the court of Special Judge Mr Gurbir Singh (Additional Sessions Judge). After going through the order of the High Court, the judge adjourned the case till December 2.
The orders for staying further proceedings in the trial court were passed by Mr Justice Ranjit Singh of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a revision petition filed by Subash Chander Katty and another co-accused against the order of the trial court for framing charges against them.
Justice Ranjit Singh stayed the proceedings with the observations, ‘‘This revision petition impugns the order of framing charges under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against the
petitioners. They had rather exposed the acts of police officials in accepting bribe.’’ The case would now come up for hearing before the High Court on October 23. .
It may be recalled that on March 1, 2006 the Special Judge, Mr Gurbir Singh, had framed charges against the petitioners under Section 12 (abetting corruption) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. While the rest of the accused, who were police officials, were charged under other sections of the Act.
It was claimed by the petitioners in their petition before the High Court that they were dealing in lottery business and several police officials used to harass them and used to seek illegal gratification. Fed up with the daily blackmailing, harassment and interference of the police officials on one pretext or the other, they recorded the video of the police officials taking bribe from them. The CD had been prepared with the intention of showing it to senior police officials, who could have saved them from harassment, added the petitioners.
After preparing the CD, the matter was brought to the notice of senior police officials. But when no action was taken, the CD was given to mediapersons. When the case was highlighted, a case under Sections 7, 12, 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against the erring police officials, at Police Station Division No. 6 on April 24, 2003. But instead of making them the prosecution witnesses, they were also charge sheeted just to help the police officials in getting an acquittal.
The petitioners had submitted before the High Court that one of the senior officials of the prosecution had opined to put the petitioners in the list of witnesses. But instead of putting them in the list of witnesses they were also made accused.
