safegaurds of public servant against malafide complaints of demanding bribe
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 01 January 2012
This query is : Resolved
1-Are there any safeguards of the public
servants against mala fide & fake complaints of demanding bribe in PC ACT 1988 ? As the trap team itself consist of the police persons who themself may get allured by the complainant ..the members of the trap team themself being public servants can not be assumed to be honest .
2-Is the process of laying trap is legally allowed in the PC ACT 1988 ?
3-Are there any specific guidelines laid down in the PC ACT 1988, to be followed before laying the trap?
4- Are there any minimum requirements which a complaint of demanding bribe should full fill before it qualify to be accepted for its futher investigation ?
5- Is it not suspicious and unjustifiable in nature to lay a trap for arrest with the help of armed persons of the police who are treated as witness of the trap ?
6- Is not a only case where the crime is forced to be committed by hook or crook ?
7- Is is not a process which is against natural justice as the public servant is not given any chance to put his facts?
8-Is the provision of laying trap and making arrest , free from the scope of ""fake encounter like situation" ?
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 02 January 2012
It is very difficult to prove corruption.
How will you handle it , or prove corruption, if no chemical spread on currency note, or not note the numbers of currency note or without any witness??
So trap is necessary, when Anti corruption get reliable complain, and arrange for trap.
Despite all precautions, AB branch fails to prove majority cases as witness are paid off, and complainant himself get fed up, harassed for years and prefer to be paid up.
It takes years for trial of cases, and complainant is summoned, issued Warrant and jailed for not appearing in court, for the summon never served upon him, and managed by corrupt people.
There is lots of corruption in Anti Corruption Staff too.
Probably they too should do so in video/ audio shooting.
Now no officer collect money in their office or by themselves. Their Agent collect corruption money elsewhere, ind inform concerned officer, who carry n work as desired by payer. Modern Technology of corruption safeguard main persons. Only small fish comes in net, who are almost innocent and trapped.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 02 January 2012
You questions are answered as under :-
1-Are there any safeguards of the public
servants against mala fide & fake complaints of demanding bribe in PC ACT 1988 ?
Ans : Best safeguard is not taking bribe.
As the trap team itself consist of the police persons who themself may get allured by the complainant ..the members of the trap team themself being public servants can not be assumed to be honest .
Ans : Even CBI staff has been trapped
2-Is the process of laying trap is legally allowed in the PC ACT 1988 ?
Ans : PC Act does not prescribe any such process.
3-Are there any specific guidelines laid down in the PC ACT 1988, to be followed before laying the trap?
Ans : PC Act has no such guidelines.
4- Are there any minimum requirements which a complaint of demanding bribe should full fill before it qualify to be accepted for its futher investigation ?
Ans : The complainant should be able to give tainted currency to the accused before panch witness.
5- Is it not suspicious and unjustifiable in nature to lay a trap for arrest with the help of armed persons of the police who are treated as witness of the trap ?
Ans : At times it has been reported that unarmed CBI teams have benemanhandled by the office staff.
6- Is not a only case where the crime is forced to be committed by hook or crook ?
Ans : Highly subjective issue.
7- Is is not a process which is against natural justice as the public servant is not given any chance to put his facts?
Ans : No. Natural justice is followed by court. In no crime the accused can be given an opportunity to show cause why he should not be arrested.
8-Is the provision of laying trap and making arrest , free from the scope of ""fake encounter like situation" ?
Ans : No. Every process has feat of misuse.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 02 January 2012
1-Are there any safeguards of the public
servants against mala fide & fake complaints of demanding bribe in PC ACT 1988 ? As the trap team itself consist of the police persons who themself may get allured by the complainant ..the members of the trap team themself being public servants can not be assumed to be honest .
Solution: dont accept any money from the public, other than the prescribed fee if any.
2-Is the process of laying trap is legally allowed in the PC ACT 1988 ?
Reply : TRAP this word is not used in PC Act.
3-Are there any specific guidelines laid down in the PC ACT 1988, to be followed before laying the trap?
Reply : TRAP this word is not used in PC Act.
4- Are there any minimum requirements which a complaint of demanding bribe should full fill before it qualify to be accepted for its futher investigation ?
Reply:- the complaint should show that there is a demand of bribe.
5- Is it not suspicious and unjustifiable in nature to lay a trap for arrest with the help of armed persons of the police who are treated as witness of the trap ?
Reply: Many of the Supremecourt judgements say the trap witnesses alone can not be relied, with out any corroboration. Because the trap witnesses will have the mentality of "success in the Trap, because they are part of the drama"
6- Is not a only case where the crime is forced to be committed by hook or crook ?
Reply: only when there is a demand for bribe, the pc act will operate. If any body force the officer to take the bribe, the PC act will not operate.
7- Is is not a process which is against natural justice as the public servant is not given any chance to put his facts?
Reply: the public servant is having all the opportunity in the court.
8-Is the provision of laying trap and making arrest , free from the scope of ""fake encounter like situation" ?
Reply: not at all. without this how can the corruption can be controlled.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 02 January 2012
Arunagiriji...please elaborate point# 4 as to what kind of proof should be given to prove demand of the bribe !..i am enclosing a complain letter..is it enough to accept the complain for FIR and investigation..where even date of demand and meeting is not disclosed...
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 02 January 2012
Arunagiriji....your reply to point no # 7 and 8 seems less reasonable as you are not caring about the following genuine aspects :
(i) public servant does get opportunity in court ...but years take for it..and his hard earned govt job and social image hangs in air for all those years..
(ii) arrest of public servant on the basis of complain...will never end curruption...rather it will encourage the public servants to make collusion with the notorious contractors etc
and would get involved more in the curruption..to ensure no complain..
infact curruption takes place with nexus..such complains are fully due to either official grudges ...or ...wrath of any mafia or wrath of any senior IAS /IPS officers or minister etc..
Have you ever heared trap of any DM or SSP , CM or PM ...never...why ?
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 03 January 2012
It is always easy said than done.
No more advice would do unless we understand this issue from the core of heart.
Even a popular movement against corruption has died recently.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 03 January 2012
Dear anonymous,
your attachment is in hindi. please post the English translation.
Please avoid comments on the opinions of the experts. You can ask any clarification.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 05 January 2012
Nothing more to add.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 15 January 2012
I hope this complant was sufficient. Did you meet any authroity with this complaint?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 15 January 2012
I think much has already been opined so there is no use to add some more burden ove author.
