Official accused of earning Rs 3.30 cr illegally, court rejects bail

Representational Pic

The Special Anti-Corruption Court here Wednesday rejected the bail plea of a Housing Board official accused of misusing his official position and depositing over Rs 3 crore in his various bank accounts.

After hearing the special public prosecutors, Ghulam Jeelani, Riaz Ahmad, and the defence counsels, the special anti-corruption judge R N Watal said prima facie accused is involved in raising illegal assets by indulging in illegal practices.

The court observed that the accused was functioning as Junior Engineer in the Housing Board and by abusing his official position had deposited Rs 3.30 crore in his various bank accounts which is disproportionate to his income received through salary.

The court said that the accused holds various accounts in different branches of J&K Bank in his own name.

“As per the salary statement provided by the Housing Board, the suspect JE has received a net payable amount of Rs 10,08,892 from January 1, 2018 to September 30, 2020 which stands deposited in his salary account. However, during the course of verification it was found that an amount of approximately Rs 3.30 crore has been deposited in his six accounts,” the court said.

It observed that verification conducted by the Anti Corruption Bureau had also revealed that the accused had been receiving huge amounts as illegal gratification with respect to execution of works on the ground from these contractors.

“The accused has abused his official position and obtained undue pecuniary advantage through illegal gratification from various contractors by various deposits accumulated in his bank accounts,” the court said.

It observed that the accused official had acquired various properties during the period of his service by resorting to illegal acts which are disproportionate to his known source of income.

The court said that there were sufficient reasons to believe that the properties acquired by the accused were proceeds of the corrupt practices in which he had indulged during his government duties.

“I am of the considerate view that the petitioner has failed to carve out a prima facie case for bail for the indulgence of this court,” the court said and rejected his bail application.