Former IFS Officer: Former IFS Officer Acquitted in 17-Year-Old Graft Case | Nagpur News
NAGPUR: A court has acquitted former IFS officer RM Dayal, who was conservator of forest (CF), North Chandrapur Circle, when he was arrested 17 years ago for allegedly taking ₹2.20 lakh illegal gratification. He was found not guilty and acquitted of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Dayal was accused of voluntarily accepting bribe of ₹2.20 lakh on June 3, 2007, from complainant Abdul Wahab Mohammad Usman Gani Nagani, a forest contractor from Kamptee.The tainted money had been recovered from the accused in the presence of witnesses.
Nagani had bagged a contract for bamboo felling in the Chatgaon range of Gadchiroli in January 2007. The complainant quoted a rate of ₹1,885 per notional tonne and was allowed to lift 1,175 tonnes of bamboo.
Nagani had to deposit around ₹27 lakh with the forest department. However, as per the tender conditions, the complainant deposited 30% of the amount immediately and started bamboo felling and transportation. Nagani alleged that from January-April 2007 the work went smoothly. During this period, he lifted bamboo by paying the total tender amount of ₹27 lakh. At that time, 900 tonnes of bamboo worth ₹20 lakh was still lying in the forest, but officers prevented him from lifting the material despite payment.
When Nagani spoke to forest officials, Chandrapur deputy conservator (DyCF) in May 2007 demanded a bribe of ₹5 lakh. As the complainant showed inability to pay such a huge amount, it was scaled down to ₹2 lakh. The complainant paid ₹1 lakh to the DyCF on May 24, 2007, and ₹50,000 to an ACF.
Thereafter, the order was issued to transport 150 tonnes of bamboo but not the entire stock. When Nagani contacted the DyCF, he asked him to also pay Dayal, who allegedly demanded ₹3 lakh.
Nagani then approached ACB sleuths and a trap was laid leading to the seizure of ₹2.20 lakh from Dayal’s official bungalow. The complainant also recorded a conversation with Dayal on his private voice recorder. Special judge Girish G Bhalchandra found that the sanction of prosecution was not valid, and prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused made a demand of bribe to the complainant.
In its order, the court said, “Prosecution failed to prove that sanction of prosecution of accused is valid. Besides, the prosecution also could not prove that the accused voluntarily accepted ₹2.20 lakh from the complainant, knowing it was a bribe, and the money so accepted was recovered from the accused.”
Dayal was accused of voluntarily accepting bribe of ₹2.20 lakh on June 3, 2007, from complainant Abdul Wahab Mohammad Usman Gani Nagani, a forest contractor from Kamptee.The tainted money had been recovered from the accused in the presence of witnesses.
Nagani had bagged a contract for bamboo felling in the Chatgaon range of Gadchiroli in January 2007. The complainant quoted a rate of ₹1,885 per notional tonne and was allowed to lift 1,175 tonnes of bamboo.
Nagani had to deposit around ₹27 lakh with the forest department. However, as per the tender conditions, the complainant deposited 30% of the amount immediately and started bamboo felling and transportation. Nagani alleged that from January-April 2007 the work went smoothly. During this period, he lifted bamboo by paying the total tender amount of ₹27 lakh. At that time, 900 tonnes of bamboo worth ₹20 lakh was still lying in the forest, but officers prevented him from lifting the material despite payment.
When Nagani spoke to forest officials, Chandrapur deputy conservator (DyCF) in May 2007 demanded a bribe of ₹5 lakh. As the complainant showed inability to pay such a huge amount, it was scaled down to ₹2 lakh. The complainant paid ₹1 lakh to the DyCF on May 24, 2007, and ₹50,000 to an ACF.
Thereafter, the order was issued to transport 150 tonnes of bamboo but not the entire stock. When Nagani contacted the DyCF, he asked him to also pay Dayal, who allegedly demanded ₹3 lakh.
Nagani then approached ACB sleuths and a trap was laid leading to the seizure of ₹2.20 lakh from Dayal’s official bungalow. The complainant also recorded a conversation with Dayal on his private voice recorder. Special judge Girish G Bhalchandra found that the sanction of prosecution was not valid, and prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused made a demand of bribe to the complainant.
In its order, the court said, “Prosecution failed to prove that sanction of prosecution of accused is valid. Besides, the prosecution also could not prove that the accused voluntarily accepted ₹2.20 lakh from the complainant, knowing it was a bribe, and the money so accepted was recovered from the accused.”