Jammu, July 17 : Special Judge, anti-corruption, Sanjay Dhar today framed corruption charges against a Tehsildar and some other revenue officials. The charges were framed under sections 420, 466, 468 and 471 read with section 5 (2) of P C Act and section 120-B of RPC against then patwari halqa Domana (at present attached with DC office) Rajinder Kumar, son of Behari Lal of Paloura, then Tehsildar, Jammu (at present, tehsildar Udhampur) Subash Singh Chib, son of Thakur Suram Singh of Lale-Da-Bagh, Barnai, Jagdev Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Jasdev Singh and Shivdev Singh, all sons of Janak Singh of Morha Kaink, Kot-Bhalwal, and Narayan Singh, son of Rasal Singh of 22-C, Vasant Vihar, Canal Road. All of them were challaned by the Crime Branch. According to the crime branch case title to the land measuring 40 kanals and 05 marlas in Khasra Nos 500 and 525 situated at Raipur Domana was acquired by accused Jagdev Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Shivdev Singh and Jasdev Singh under section 4 & 8 of Agrarian Reforms Act 1976. It is alleged that the accused in connivance with Narayan Singh managed to procure eight different Fard-e-Intikhabs in respect of 28 kanals and 14 marlas of aforesaid land that were prepared by accused Rajinder Kumar the concerned Patwari and attested by accused Subash Singh Chib the concerned Tehsildar for the purpose of sale of aforesaid land to eight different persons. It is the case of prosecution that the Fard-e-Intikhabs were issued by accused without mentioning therein the fact that the land in question had been acquired by the owners under section 4 and 8 of Agrarian Reforms Act and also without mentioning the fact that accused Shivdev Singh had mortgaged his share in land under Khasra Nos. 500 and 525 min with Jammu Rural Bank, Bhalwal. According to prosecution, the concealment of aforesaid material facts, while issuing the Fard-e-Intikhabs, was malicious, intentional and dishonest in as much as Subash Singh, then tehsildar, had demanded and accepted gratification of Rs 4 lakh through Narayan Singh for issuing the aforesaid Fard-e-Intikhabs.
It is also alleged that after the registration of sale deeds on the basis of aforesaid Fard-e-Intikhabs in favour of purchasers, accused No 1 made a further demand of Rs 40 lakh from the purchasers for effecting mutation of the land in question in their favour and when they failed to meet the demand, Rajinder Kumar passed an order on October 10, 2011 in terms of section 28-A of Agrarian Reforms Act thereby eschewing the land in question in favour of state. After completion of investigation, the challan was presented. The judge, after hearing the two sides, framed charges against all the accused. |
