Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 3: CJM Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh today rejected the bail plea of four persons including retired Tehsildar, who were arrested during the joint raids of police and Revenue Department officials.
After hearing APP Kuldeep Bhat for the UT whereas battery of lawyers for the applicants, CJM rejected the bail applications of Sadeeq Poswal, a property dealer of Channi Himmat, Mohammad Bashir, retired Tehsildar of Janipura, Dharampal, retired Girdawar from Sarore and Ghulam Rasool, retired Girdawar from Sunjwan.
“From investigation carried out up till now, it is crucial to piece together different facets gathered as evidence. It is also note worthy that core of premise that set forth investigation rested on the complaint by complainant regarding missing of revenue records of Sunjwan and Chowadi villages of Tehsil Bahu”, the CJM said, adding “seizure of revenue records comprising of different mutation paratsarkars, register of Jamabandhi, Aks of village Sunjwan, original record of rights of village in Bishnah, original register of Khasra Girdawari, original paratsarkar of different mutations of village Chowadi, photocopy of field book of village Chowadi, photocopy of Latha/Massavi, Aks Massavi of village Deeli and other revenue record from private residences of petitioners only reveals the scale of gravity of allegations against them and web of complexity requiring dis-entangling during investigation”.
“The chilling aspect is that if revenue record has been found missing since long time, recovery of part of same, original or in the shape of photocopies – from the private residences of petitioners only bespeaks of the magnitude of the issue”, the court said, adding “till date, Special Investigating Team has not been able to even identify the revenue officials to whom the missing record was entrusted and how part of same (record) landed so effortlessly in private custody of the petitioners”.
“Investigation also suggests that whatever has come forth till date is only a tip of ice-berg and with every step forward that investigation is making, fog is getting denser. If SIT has not been able to identify, leave alone round up, the smaller un-scrupulous characters involved in the conspiracy of offences involved in the FIR in question, laying hands on bigger sharks then appears to be a distant possibility in this seemingly well-oiled nexus”, the CJM said.
“Some of the record alleged to have been seized is said to be in dilapidated condition. Investigation indeed prima facie supports charge of offences under Sections 380/477/120-B of IPC against petitioners. Merely because it is yet to be established as to whom the lost/missing revenue record was entrusted originally is yet to be established during investigation – would not ipso facto mean that record has been misplaced without the involvement/connivance of concerned revenue officials”, the court said.
With these observations, court rejected the bail application.
Follow our WhatsApp channel