Senior Civil Servant Detained In Odisha Corruption Sting Operation
The arrest occurred at Chakma's official government residence in Dharamgarh, where the officer allegedly received what vigilance officials described as a partial payment of a larger Rs 20 lakh demand. The businessman who became the complainant in this case alleged that the administrative officer had issued threats against his commercial operations unless the requested payment was made.
During the carefully orchestrated sting operation, surveillance teams observed Chakma receiving the cash payment at his official quarters and subsequently placing the money in a desk drawer within his residence office. The officer reportedly methodically counted all 26 bundles of various denomination Rs 100 notes before securing them in the furniture.
The vigilance investigation expanded beyond the immediate bribery incident, with search teams recovering approximately Rs 47 lakh in additional cash from various locations within the officer's official residence. This substantial sum raised further questions about the scope of alleged corrupt activities.
Legal proceedings have commenced against Chakma under applicable provisions of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, with investigators continuing to examine the full extent of the alleged misconduct. The case represents a significant development in the state's ongoing efforts to combat administrative corruption.
The arrest carries particular significance given Chakma's previous public statements about public service ideals. Following his successful completion of the UPSC examination in 2021 and initial selection for the Indian Foreign Services, Chakma had expressed ambitious goals for serving his country and the northeastern region in particular. In a media interview at the time, he spoke passionately about addressing financial disparities and social divisions in the northeast, emphasizing his desire to work toward better resource utilization and regional unity.
The contrast between these earlier stated aspirations for public welfare and the current allegations of exploiting his administrative position for personal gain has drawn attention to the challenges of maintaining ethical standards in civil service. The case underscores ongoing concerns about corruption within government departments and the importance of vigilance mechanisms in maintaining public trust.
Authorities continue their investigation to determine whether additional individuals or transactions may be connected to this case, as part of broader efforts to ensure accountability in public administration.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Land for jobs ‘corruption' case: CBI ‘cherry picking' to target Lalu family, argues lawyer in court
THE CBI is 'cherry picking' to target the family of former Bihar chief minister and RJD chief Lalu Prasad in the land for jobs 'corruption' case, argued his lawyer before a Delhi Court on Friday. Lalu and his family have been accused by the CBI of enabling the recruitment of candidates for Group D railway substitute jobs who had allegedly transferred them land parcels as a quid pro quo. 'They're trying to dig deep to open all threads against the family… They're trying to link their names somehow,' argued Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, who is representing Lalu's daughters Misa Bharti and Hema Yadav. Singh was accompanied in court by advocate Aekta Vats. 'The land sales were years apart from the dates when the jobs were given… How can the CBI connect the two,' he argued before Special Judge Vishal Gogne of Rouse Avenue Courts. 'In three days, the Pacific Ocean changed due to the tsunami… multiple years is a long long time to wait.' 'This case seems to be the interpretation of one gentleman who sits in a room determined to point out that something was wrong,' the advocate said. 'The CBI has said there were no requirements for the jobs and that there was no urgency… Has any (land) seller ever told them they were under pressure from Lalu Prasad,' Singh asked the court. Singh also said while there were 103 accused persons in the case, there was a mention of just 12 land parcels in the chargesheets. Earlier last month, the CBI which was represented in court by Senior Advocate and Special Public Prosecutor D P Singh and Advocate Manu Mishra, had argued that Lalu had threatened Railway Ministry officials to speed up the recruitment process. The CBI case pertains to the alleged transfer of land at cheap rates to the RJD chief and his family in return for appointments made in Group-D substitute jobs in the Central Railways between 2004 and 2009, when Lalu was the Railway Minister. In its multiple chargesheets, the CBI has claimed that there were several discrepancies in the documents furnished by those who were given jobs in exchange for land such as candidates having sequential roll numbers on their caste and residence certificates. As per the CBI, Lalu had earlier acquired over 1 lakh square feet of land for only Rs 26 lakh as against the circle rate of over Rs 4.39 crore.
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
‘Conspiracy not proven': special judge while dismissing all charges in Malegaon blast case
Seventeen years after a powerful blast shook the communally sensitive town of Malegaon in Maharashtra, a special NIA court in Mumbai has acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 blast case, sharply criticising the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for presenting what it called 'inconclusive,' 'unreliable,' and 'legally inadmissible' evidence. In a 1,036-page judgment that was delivered on July 31 and made available on August 1, evening, Special Judge A.K. Lahoti observed that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt and dismissed the alleged terror conspiracy attributed to the right-wing outfit Abhinav Bharat. 'Upon a comprehensive evaluation of the entire evidence available on record, I am of the considered view that the prosecution has failed to adduce cogent, reliable, and legally acceptable evidence. The testimony of prosecution witnesses is riddled with material inconsistencies and contradictions. Such discrepancies undermine the credibility of the prosecution's case and fall short of establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,' the order said. The court further said, that the accused Pragyasingh Chandrapalsingh Thakur, Major Ramesh Shivji Upadhyaya, Sameer Sharad Kulkarni, Ajay Raja Eknath Rahirkar, Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit, Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi and Sudhakar Onkarnath Chaturvedi are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable Sections 120-B, 153-A, 302, 307, 326, 324, 427 IPC and sections 16 and 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Substances Act,1908 vide section 235(1) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973. 'Bail bond of accused persons stand cancelled. The sureties stand discharged. The prosecuting agencies are at liberty to file a separate charge-sheet against the absconding accused Ramji Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange on their arrest. All the Muddemal including gadgets shall be preserved in safe and sure custody. It should be ensured that all the Muddemal would be made available whenever called by the Appellate court or needed for trial against absconding accused or disposal as per the rules,' the judgement said. The accused persons are directed to execute the bail bonds with surety in the amount of ₹20,000 each to appear before the higher court in compliance of section 437-A of the code of criminal procedure, 1973. The copy of the judgement is also to be sent to collector, D.G. of ATS and NIA for perusal and necessary action, the judge directed. The victims and injured are entitled to get compensation under the victim's compensation scheme. 'And hence, the prosecuting agency to prepare the separate victims / injured list and shall be forwarded to DLSA Mumbai, for compensation. After receipt of the said list, the DLSA, Mumbai to take the necessary steps to get the compensation to the victims. The compensatory amount of Rs. Two Lakh to each deceased family be paid and the amount of Rs.50,000/- to each injured be paid,' the order said. On September 29, 2008, during the holy month of Ramzan, a powerful bomb explosion rocked a crowded area in Malegaon around 9:35 p.m. The blast occurred near Shakeel Goods Transport Company, between Anjuman Chowk and Bhiku Chowk. The explosive device had been planted on an LML Freedom motorcycle bearing a fake registration number — MH-15-P-4572. The explosion killed six people, left 101 injured, and caused significant damage to nearby properties. The prosecution examined a total of 323 witnesses over the course of the trial. The investigation spanned across three agencies over the years: the Local Crime Branch (LCB), Nashik Gramin, in coordination with Azad Nagar Police Station, Malegaon; the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), Mumbai; and later, the National Investigation Agency (NIA), New Delhi, which took over the case in 2011. The judge while reading the judgement on July 31, said, 'After completion of marathon hearing advanced by them, I have gone through written notes of arguments, charge-sheets and entire evidence on record in the form of oral and documentary. In the backdrop of the facts, it is also necessary to mention that the evidence on record creates grave suspicion against the accused but on mere suspicion there cannot be a conviction. Hence, I am extending the benefit of doubt.' The court, while analysing the credibility of witness testimonies, emphasised that statements recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC—whether oral, written, or in electronic form—are not substantive evidence. They can be used solely to highlight contradictions or omissions during a trial. For such statements to carry weight, the witness must clearly acknowledge them during their deposition. Moreover, the court must be convinced that the statement was made voluntarily, free from coercion, tutoring, or pressure. If these conditions are not met, the court noted, such statements lose evidentiary value and are liable to be discarded. 'Before I conclude, it is necessary to place on record the fact that, I am fully aware of the degree of agony, frustration, and trauma caused to society at large and, more particularly, to the families of the victims by the fact that a heinous crime of this nature has gone unpunished. However, the law does not permit courts to convict an accused solely on the basis of moral conviction or suspicion. No doubt, terrorism has no religion because no religion in the world preaches violence. The court of law is not supposed to proceed on popular or predominant public perceptions about the matter,' the judge said. It further added, 'It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that the burden rests entirely upon the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, based on admissible and credible evidence. The more serious offence, the higher standard of proof required for conviction. Admittedly, in the present case there is no reliable, cogent and acceptable evidence on record, as discussed supra, to warrant the conviction.' The court noted that most witnesses turned hostile, stating during their testimony that their earlier statements were not given voluntarily but were dictated under coercion by ATS officers. Several also alleged torture, ill-treatment, and illegal detention during the investigation. While no formal complaints were filed against the officers, the court held that this alone could not be used to discredit the witnesses. It observed that the absence of complaints does not negate the possibility of coercion, as decisions to report misconduct often depend on factors such as fear of retaliation, psychological trauma, and lack of confidence in the system. 'Moreover, it emerges from the evidence of witnesses that certain witnesses have demonstrated courage and filed complaints against ATS personnel, specifically alleging acts of torture, harassment, and illegal detention. In addition to it, the several facts are admitted by the investigating officer of NIA PW-321 ( Anil Dubey) in his cross examination which also shows that, during the course of their investigation, it was transpired that, the ATS officers tortured, illegally detained not only to the some witnesses but also the accused. This underscores the credibility of such allegations,' the judge observed. The court observed that two key agencies — ATS and NIA — carried out separate and independent investigations, each filing its own charge-sheet. However, allegations of torture, misconduct, and illegal detention were made solely against ATS officers, with no such claims against NIA personnel. This, the court noted, raises serious concerns about the conduct of the ATS and casts doubt on the credibility of the evidence it collected during its investigation. 'I have gone through the aforesaid citations. I have no doubt about the legal propositions laid down in the aforesaid citations. It is also necessary to mention that, mere filing or placing on record the number of citations would not be enough when facts are not supporting to the case of prosecution. With due respect, the facts of the present case are different than the facts mentioned in aforesaid citations and hence, in the present scenario of the case, the citations filed on record by prosecution would not helpful to them,' the order read. The court noted that the prosecution failed to examine several material witnesses, whose names were referenced in specific portions of the judgment. While it is the prosecutor's discretion to decide which witnesses to present, this discretion must be exercised fairly and in the interest of justice. The prosecution must not withhold witnesses merely because their testimony may weaken its case. In serious offences like murder, the prosecutor's duty is not just to secure convictions, but to assist the court in arriving at the truth. The court added that if it appears that key witnesses were deliberately kept back, it is open to the court to draw an adverse inference, indicating serious infirmities in the prosecution's case. The statements of key witnesses relating to the alleged conspiracy, meetings, or other incriminating circumstances have not sufficiently supported the case of the prosecuting agency. While there may be strong suspicion against the accused, mere suspicion cannot take the place of legal proof, the order said. It is pertinent to note that the witnesses deposed after a considerable lapse of time from the date of the alleged incident, which has led to natural lapses in memory and narration, it added. 'However, when contradictions, omissions, embellishments, and other infirmities in the testimony raise grave doubts regarding the veracity of the prosecution's version, it would be unsafe for the Court to rely on such evidence. Though, the testimony of police witnesses suggest that they were consistent and meticulous in detailing the procedural aspect concerning the recording of statements, arrest and recovery of articles, but the overall evidence does not inspire sufficient confidence to warrant conviction.'
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Doctor in trafficking net insisted couple opt for surrogacy despite being fit to conceive
Hyderabad: Citing her 25 years of experience, Dr A Namratha of Srushti Test Tube Baby Centre — arrested by Hyderabad police along with seven others in the alleged baby-selling racket — insisted that the complainant couple opt for surrogacy. This, despite the couple's medical tests confirming them fit to conceive. The tests were worth Rs 66,000. These revelations have come to light in the remand report filed by Gopalapuram police recently. The report also stated that the doctor used to store all surrogacy-related documentation in a separate consultancy room to keep it out of the reach of the staff and ensure that none of the records were handed over to patients. The remand report stated that the complainant couple was told by Dr Namratha in September last year that a healthy embryo was successfully implanted in the surrogate and confirmation of pregnancy was awaited. "Believing this the couple made further payments…...Dr Namratha later confirmed the pregnancy (to the complainants) over a phone call and periodically shared some medical reports, but withheld originals and did not allow complainant to retain even digital copies, often forcing them to leave their phones outside her office," the report added. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Up to 70% off | Shop Sale Libas Undo You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad Dr Namratha promised the complainants that a healthy child would be delivered to them after DNA confirmation and for that, their own sperm and eggs would be used to develop embryos. However, she handed them a two-day-old boy born to an Assamese couple, under the pretext that the child was biologically theirs. According to the remand report, when the complainants confronted Dr Namratha about it, she "verbally accepted her mistake" and sought time to resolve it. "But the couple could not reach her after that despite trying multiple times," the report added. Cops have also found that another accused, Dr N Sadanandam of Gandhi Hospital, used to supply anaesthesia to Dr Namratha despite knowing that the centre was running without registration. The Telangana Medical Council (TGMC) has served a show cause notice to both the jailed doctors. While eight accused have been arrested in the case, three others - Kalpana, Sanjay and Nandini - are absconding. MSID:: 123044508 413 |
