TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Amritsar Improvement Trust chairman Dinesh Bassi gets bail in graft case

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Chandigarh, February 1

Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted a regular bail to Amritsar Improvement Trust chairman Dinesh Bassi in a corruption case after observing that the trial had not even commenced till date.

Advertisement

Observing that the petitioner otherwise had a clean record, Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill added further detention in the circumstances would not serve any useful purpose.

Bassi was seeking bail in the case registered in July 2022 for criminal breach of trust and other offences under Sections 409, 201 and 120-B of the IPC and the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The state’s stand in the matter was that sufficient evidence had been collected to establish the petitioner’s complicity in causing huge loss to the Amritsar Improvement Trust. A plot was sold by the Trust for peanuts pursuant to a conscious decision taken by the petitioner.

Advertisement

Appearing on Bassi’s behalf, senior counsel RS Rai with Abhinav Sood and Vardaan Malhotra contended the petitioner had been falsely implicated. There was no evidence worth credence to establish the allegations levelled by the prosecution.

After hearing arguments, Justice Gill asserted: “It is correct that serious allegations of embezzlement of huge amount have been levelled against the petitioner, who had extended undue favours while misusing his position. However, this court cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of seven months and challan already stands presented.”

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement