Former CBEC Chief Commissioner Acquitted in CBI Case
THE Patiala House Special Court for CBI (PC Act) yesterday acquitted Ram Prakash who retired as a Chief Commissioner in Customs and Central Excise, (DG, Service Tax) in a corruption case.
The case had been registered against accused Ram Prakash (A1) that while working as a public servant in the capacity of Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, he indulged in corrupt practices.
It was charged that he had demanded and accepted an illegal gratification of Rs 5 lakhs from an assessee by threatening to seize the books of accounts and bank accounts, if said bribe amount of Rs 5 lakhs was not paid to him.
In an elaborate judgement running into 83 pages, the Special Judge observed,
"Of course, officers of CBI, the premier investigating agency, at the outset cannot be said to be untrustworthy but when in a serious case of alleged corruption by a senior bureaucrat is being investigated, suspicion is laid over the senior bureaucrat of alleged corruption by allegedly demanding and accepting bribe through a subordinate, what is expected by a Court from the officers of investigating agency is firstly to proceed as per the procedure established, law laid, thereupon to conduct meticulous preliminary inquiry, inquiry and investigation, collect the best possible incriminating evidence at the first instance against such suspects/accused to lend credence and avoid criticism.”
A Superintendent working under the Commissioner and two officers from the assessee company had turned approvers, but the Court did not accept their testimonies observing,
The shaken and uncorroborated testimonies of approver witnesses PW1, PW2 and PW3, which are wholly unreliable, not confirming with collateral circumstances as well as probabilities, but shrouded with grave suspicion and serious doubts, narrating even the scene of crime in contradiction with each other, lead me to conclusion that it would be extremely hazardous to place implicit reliance on such shaken testimonies of approver witnesses PW1, PW2 and PW3 as from their testimonies it is not feasible to separate truth from falsehood, because grain and chaff are inextricably mixed up, and in the process of separation an absolutely new case has to be reconstructed by divorcing essential details presented by the prosecution completely from the context and the background against which they are made, the only available course to be made is discard the tainted evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW3 in toto.
CBI case - a retirement gift? Commenting on the CBI investigation, the Court observed,
Lack of fairness apparent on part of the concerned officers of premier investigating agency in investigation of this matter merits deprecation. Instead of having allowed A1 to put his bones to rest after his superannuation from the post of Director General, Service Tax, Mumbai, he was presented with the case in hand against him six months later as like a retirement gift by the premier investigating agency as a consequence of its lackadaisical investigation in this case. Inescapable conclusion on entire aforesaid discussion is that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against A1 beyond reasonable doubt.
Accordingly accused Ram Prakash (A1) is held not guilty and acquitted for the offences charged. His bail bond is cancelled. Surety is discharged.