Mining official gets 4-year RI for taking bribe

Ludhiana: A local court here has sentenced a mining official to four years of rigorous imprisonment for taking a bribe of Rs 25,000.
Special judge Amrinder Singh Shergill also imposed a fine of Rs 35,000 on the convict, failing to pay which he will have to undergo five more months of rigorous imprisonment.
The Vigilance Bureau had filed a case against Kuldeep Singh JTA, office of general manager/mining officer, district industry centre, Miller Ganj, under the Prevention of Corruption (Amended) Act, 2018 on July 3, 2017.
Kuldeep currently resides in Dugri.
As per the prosecution, the complainant, Mohinderpal Singh, told DSP Jaswinder Singh that the accused, a mining official, harassed drivers of the transport company that he ran with a partner to transport sand and gravel, etc. The complainant said all fees and royalties for the vehicles had been paid. But the accused stopped their vehicles and, after checking the papers, claimed that the bills were fake, threatening to impound the vehicles if a bribe was not paid.
On June 26, 2017, the accused stopped another vehicle of the complainant at a bridge over Garhi canal. The driver, Jagtar Singh, produced the royalty receipt and bill, after which he called the complainant. The complainant alleged that Kuldeep Singh demanded a monthly bribe of Rs 50,000 to allow the vehicles to operate in the area. After negotiations, he settled for Rs 30,000 per month.
On July 1, 2017, the complainant said he paid Rs 5,000 bribe to the accused at a dhaba in Ballion village on Machhiwara-Samrala Road and promised to pay the remaining Rs 25,000 later. On the advice of his friend, he filed a complaint in the VB office.
Vigilance sleuths caught the accused red-handed while accepting the bribe of Rs 25,000 from the complainant. After an investigation, police presented a charge-sheet against him in court.
During the trial of the case, the accused claimed false implication. The defence counsel argued that the accused did not allow the complainant and his employees to engage in illegal work.
The court observed that the accused had not furnished proof of illegal mining. It was also observed that the prosecution had successfully proven the offence by the accused beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt.