Site news

PROBE ARREST OF HONEST THASILDAR INGALE BY ACB INSPECTOR BAGLKOT “TRAP” CANNOT HAPPEN WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF ACCUSED

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
PROBE ARREST OF HONEST THASILDAR INGALE BY ACB INSPECTOR BAGLKOT “TRAP” CANNOT HAPPEN WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF ACCUSED
by System Administrator - Thursday, 2 February 2017, 10:25 AM
 

By : M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangalore : I have filed an RTI Application to to PIO ACB ADGP at Bangalore to provide me information and reasons under section 4(1) (d) RTI Act 2005 for not taking any action against ACB Police inspector Bagalkot as per law for fabricating a false complaint and false FIR and arresting a white handed Thasildarwithout authority of law. ACB cannot punish innocents. For cases other than trap or cases of disproportionate assets to the known sources of income ACB need Government permission to prosecute .The object of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not only to prevent corruption among public servants, but also to prevent the harassment of honest among them," observed criminal law expert's .Reportedly News papers have reported one side story as told by ACB Bagalkot. "Normally one would have expected the ACB Inspectorto instruct the defacto complainant to hand over the money even if be to an agent or a trusted lieutenant of the accused, only in the presence of the accused or at least when the accused is somewhere around in the vicinity.".It is to be noted that when trap was laid Ingle Thasildar Mudholnot present at the trap location. Anti-Corruption Bureau cannot initiate probe against a public servant on decisions and recommendations made during the discharge of his official duty without a prior permission of the appointing authority, says Para 5 of the GO creating Anti-Corruption Bureau and ACBmust Understand and prevent the harassment of honest officers and that Government has not yet communicated about suspension and Ingale Thasildar Mudholis yet on duty .Whether it is deemed suspension or suspension is effective from the date of communication by competent authority as per DPAR Circular dated 29-12-1979 as Thasildar is on duty as Government neither has suspended or transferred and DC cannot keep an honest officer out of duty and out of job. Rule 10(1)(a)of the CCA Rulesneed to be read with Rule 10(2)(a) (b) f the CCA Rules Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol cannot be suspended as he was not caught red handed.ACBis the "public authority "is under obligation to provide information "PUBLICLY” under section 4(1) (a) (b) (c) (d) RTI Act 2005 .Criminal law Experts trash ACB's Inspector trap theory; Criminal law Experts Demand ADGP ACB to probe arrest of Honest Thasildar Mr Ingale by ACB Inspector Baglkot:Criminal law Experts are trashing the ACB Inspector 'trap' theory and subsequent illegal arrest of Mr Ingale Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot which warrants action on ACB Police inspector Bagalkot and experts demand ADGP ACB to probe the circumstances shrouding the sensationalillegal arrest. "The object of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not only to prevent corruption among public servants, but also to prevent the harassment of honest among them," observed criminal law experts. According to ACB Inspector , Ingale Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkotwas arrested after one personby name Abdul accepted Rs 10,000/- to give a cheque of 16800/-from one MrKandagal official at Thasildar officeto illiterate complainantset up by ACB Inspector Bagalkot , sought detailed probe into the circumstances of his 'trapping', saying he was 'fixed' because he had taken on many illegal peopleoperating in Mudhol and he is said to be honest officer.What bothers criminal law expertsis that this kind of trap can be organizedby ACB Inspector against anyone, including an honest officer ADGB ACB himself , without such honest officer having a scent of what is happening behind his back. If an honest officer is to be fixed, it can be done by the very same procedure that the ACB Inspector had followed in this case. Criminal law expertsmake it clear that they arenot giving a certificate of good character to any one accused. All that they are trying to point out is that if people want to fix somebody, they can easily do it in this manner.".It is pointed out that the chemical coated cash was delivered to Abdulin a Thasildar record room premises and caught where Ingale Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot was not even present, : "Normally one would have expected the ACB Inspectorto instruct the defacto complainant to hand over the money even if be to an agent or a trusted lieutenant of the accused, only in the presence of the accused or at least when the accused is somewhere around in the vicinity." .Noting that that Ingle Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkothas no business pending with defacto complainantquestion of making him accuse in the case itself is void abinatio and Government of Karnataka is duty duty-bound to protect Ingle Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot from harassment of ACB as he is really honest officer and had completed his work honestly and ADGP ACB Karnatakamust probe the grievance of Ingleand investigate the circumstances surrounding the registration of the criminal case against him. If any foul play is proved, Ingale Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot could seek appropriate remedy available in law, from Karnataka state Human right commission .

DC must Understand that Government has not yet communicated about suspension and Ingale Thasildar is yet on duty .Whether it is deemed suspension or suspension is effective from the date of communication by competent authority as per DPAR Circular dated 29-12-1979 as Thasildar is on duty as Government neither has suspended or transferred and DC cannot keep an honest officer out of duty and out of job . Rule 10(1)(a)of the CCA Rulesneed to be read with Rule 10(2)(a) (b) f the CCA Rules Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol cannot be suspended as he was not caught red handed.ACB cannot punish innocents. The object of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not only to prevent corruption among public servants, but also to prevent the harassment of honest among them," observed criminal law experts .Reportedly News papers have reported one side story as told by ACB Bagalkot. The ACB Police inspector self scripted and fabricated false compliant and registered a false FIR in crime number 3/2016 dated 21-12-2016 on reportedly false complaint ofSri Shivalingappa Mantoor and arrested Thasildaron false trap as he could not be arrested red-handed but ACB Commits illegality by arresting a white handed Thasildar.ACB police has only power to institute cases by trap if ACB is successful in trapping otherwise by filing DA if they have proof against the officer of having assets disproportionate to his known sources of Income and ACB has no power to arrest white handed innocent Thasildar under Prevention of corruption Act .Reading Rule 10 (1) (a) read withRule 10 (2) (a) (b)of the CCA Rules the thasildar Mudhol cannot be "suspended” as he was not caught red-handed by ACB and question of his deemed suspension cannot operate withRule 10 (2) (a) (b)of the CCA Rules in isolation. The state Government cannot suspend the Tahsildar then DC Bagalkot cannot keep him without work under illegal suspension .ACB cannot punish innocents. Reportedly News papers have reported one side story as told by ACB Bagalkot. The false compliant and false FIR in crime number 03/2016 in ACB Police station Bagalkot and subsequent illegal arrest of Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot warrants action on ACB Police inspector Bagalkot and not on Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot as he is reportedly innocent and not committed any misconduct and irregularities as per KCSR and under section 10 (1) Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol cannot be suspended as he was not caught red-handed by ACB . Rule 10 of the CCA Rules provides for placing a Government Servant under suspension. Under section 10. Suspension. (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is sub ordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in this behalf may place a Government servant under suspension - [(a) "Where there is prima facie evidence to show that he was caught red handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorized to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law;ACB and Deputy Commissioner and Assistant commissioner cannot exercised powers illegally, arbitrarily and discriminately giving a go-bye to all norms, guidelines and principles required to be scrupulously followed asmandated by law. The deputy commissioner Bagalkot need to readRule 10 (1) (a) of the CCA Rules conjointly with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b) of the CCA Rules and when question of suspension itself does not arise in case without getting caught red handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorized to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law then question of deemed suspension does not arise under with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b) of the CCA Rules.The action of ACB Police inspector Bagalkot against Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot is illegal capricious without authority of law in reportedly and allegedly arresting himwithout any proper complaint as the complaint itself is scripted and fabricated by ACB itself stating that complainant is illiterate and complaint should have been signed by independent witness withcomplainant thumb impression but it is interesting to note that illiterate complainant has signedthe complaint in English ?. even in this scripted ACB complaint no crime is made out against Thasildar Mudhol as it mentions clearly that complainant file is not pending at the desk of Thasildar Mudhol but ACB makes him accused in False FIR . In scripted ACB complaint even evidence of bribe demand cannot be made out .Even then ACB police Inspector who mentions Abdul as attender in the office of the Thasildar does not make him accuse instead of thasildar but arrests him under fake trap or when the " trap " was failed because the officials accused in the FIRdid not touched the chemical money brought by complainant when trap tookplace and even Thasildarwas not in the location and ACB Inspector failed to get him trapped red handed and with evidence itself speaks volumes about fabricated complaint and fabricated and framed up FIR .The standard procedure for trap cases was not followed by ACB Police inspector Bagalkot also the pre-trap and the post trap procedures involved in the case not followed .ACB Inspector has violatedhuman rights of Thasildar and complainant has committed atrocity on him as Thasildar belongs to SC ST community by giving false complaint against him under section 3(1)ix of POA Act 1989 if anybodygives any false or frivolous information to any public servant and thereby causes such public servant to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.Reportedly and allegedly The ACB Police inspector scripted and fabricated false compliant and registered a false FIR in crime number 3/2016 dated 21-12-2016 on reportedly false complaint ofSri Shivalingappa Mantoor and arrested Thasildaron false trap as he could not be arrested red-handed but ACB Commits illegality by arresting a white handed Thasildar.ACB police has only power to institute cases by trap if ACB is successful in trapping otherwise by filing DA if they have proof against the officer of having assets disproportionate to his known sources of Income and ACB has no power to arrest white handed innocent Thasildar under Prevention of corruption Act .