Eight years on, Chandigarh cop gets 4-year rigorous imprisonment in Rs 10K graft case


Chandigarh, January 31

The corruption has seeped so much into the roots of the society, and every nook and corner that people have started forming a notion that for any work they have to bribe some official. Slowly, an opinion is being formed that even for their lawful work, a person or official has to be bribed.

While observing this Jagjit Singh, Special Judge, CBI court, has sentenced a constable of Chandigarh Police, Dilbagh Singh, to undergo four years of rigorous imprisonment in a corruption case registered by the agency in 2014.

The court also imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on the convict.

The police had registered a case against Inspector Rajesh Shukla, former SHO of the Sector 36 police station, Head Constable Mukesh Kumar and Constable Dilbagh Singh on the complaint of a parking contractor of Sector 34, Chandigarh, Lalit Joshi.

The CBI acquitted Head Constable Mukesh Kumar while Inspector Rajesh Shukla had died during the trial.

The three accused were arrested on September 3, 2014, on the charges of demanding and taking a bribe of Rs 10,000 from the parking contractor.

In his complaint to the CBI, the contractor had alleged that Inspector Shukla had been extorting money from him through Constable Dilbagh and Head Constable Mukesh, both posted in the Sector 34 police station.

Joshi had alleged that he was paying money every month for allowing him to run the parking lot.

He alleged that Inspector Shukla again demanded Rs 10,000. After verifying the complaint, the CBI laid a trap and arrested the accused with the bribe money.

Narender Singh, public prosecutor, stressed the need for exemplary punishment to the accused. He said the convict did not deserve any leniency. Monthly extortion by people like the convict had to be checked, as they were custodian of law and required to implement it and were well versed with it.

After hearing of the arguments, the court sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years.

“Persons like the convict should remember that our good deeds never go unrewarded, while bad deeds do not go unpunished. The good deeds lead us to good, while the bad deeds would lead to bad, and the effects of such bad deeds affect not only the individual, but also his family, and can trickle down to generations,” observed the court while rejecting the plea of the accused for leniency.