Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

THE CASE SET UP BY THE PROSECUTION :-

1. Regular Safai Karamcharis namely Sh. Jaipal Singh and Others filed a Crl. W.P. No. 58/03 before Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, in respect of irregularities being practiced by the MCD officials in Shahdara (South Zone), pertaining to leave records of regular safai karamcharis, which were being forged thereby showing them on leave and employment of Ebzedars (Substitute Safai Karamcharis) in lieu of them for that particular date or period. High Court of Delhi directed the Vigilance Department of MCD to conduct investigation and to submit it's report before the court and ultimately on a written complaint dated 27.09.2005, bearing no. ADOV/Spl. Cell/Vig./PR/2005/5277, present case was registered against the erring officials of MCD Shahdara (South Zone), who were found involved in fraudulent engagement of Ebzedars in Ward no. 68, Trilok Puri, Delhi, thereby projecting regular safai karamcharis on leave.

PW-54/ He was working as Sanitary Sh. Babu Inspector at Shahdara South Khan Zone and identified signature/handwriting of the officials working in Ward no. 68, Dallu Pura (Trilok Puri) and Shahdara South Zone, Delhi.

He further identified signatures of signatory officials on the leave applications of regular Special Judge (PC Act) CBI, East District Karkardooma Courts, Delhi CBI/6/2016 Safai Karamcharis. He further identified his thumb impression and finger print starting from S- 1141 to S-1143 (Ex. PW-

8. No arguments either oral or written were made or filed on behalf of accused Om Prakash. However, at the final stage of the case, accused Om Prakash expired on 24.03.2018 and accordingly, case stood abated against him vide order dated 05.04.2018. ARGUMENT MADE BY SR. PP FOR CBI

9. Ld. Sr. PP for CBI argued that salary of regular safai karamcharis (10) was deducted on the pretext of engaging Ebzedars (substitute safai kramcharis). Ld. PP for CBI further argued that leave applications of regular safai karamcharis were forged, which is amply explicit from the following points :-

ARGUMENT MADE ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED MAM CHAND (A4)

13.Ld. counsel for accused Mam Chand argued that FSL report cannot be read against accused persons as specimen of accused persons were not taken with permission of the court. He further argued that conspiracy means agreement between accused persons, but no such agreement was proved. He further argued that no gain was shown or alleged against the accused. Ebzedars are persons of IVth class employee and some of them are literate but many are not. Mens rea to commit any offence is necessary, which was missing in this case. He further argued that it was a routine practice that if any regular safai karamchari was absent, someone was asked to write and sign application on his behalf. It was so done on the asking of boss and thus, it cannot be said to have been done with a criminal intention and some PWs have stated about such practice. Ld. counsel submitted that the allegations that Ebzedars Mam Chand and Suresh had signed and put thumb impressions on leave applications of regular safai karamcharis, are bereft of mens rea. ARGUMENTS IN REBUTTAL