Police role suspected in embezzlement

<div class="section1"><div class="Normal">FARIDKOT: The summoning of six police officials to face trial, who were absolved in a police inquiry, in an embezzlement case by the court of chief judicial magistrate on Friday has caught the Faridkot police in an unsavoury situation.<br /><br />On the other hand, the court has discharged two accused officials in the case who were indicted in the police inquiry.<br /><br />In his order, delivered on Friday, the judge Ravinder Singh expressed astonishment on the police inquiry, conducted by SP (D) Faridkot, which indicted the junior officials and absolved the senior officials in police department in misappropriation of funds of about Rs 5 lakh.<br /><br />According to the court order, in year 2000-2001 the internal inspection of accounts branch of Faridkot police detected irregularities at large scale.The SSP Faridkot had deputed SP (H) to conduct an inquiry and it was found by the SP(H) in his detailed inquiry report in August 2002 that eight police officials in the account branch were liable for misappropriation of funds with common intention.<br /><br />An FIR was registered against ASI Prem Kumar, accountant, ASI Darshan Singh, an ex-accountant, HC Sant Ram, HC Sikander Singh, lady constable Raj Kaur and constables Sukhminder Singh, Ranjit Singh and Karamjit Singh for offence of cheating, misappropriation and tampering of official record in October 2002.<br /><br /><formid=367815><br /><br /></formid=367815></div> </div><div class="section2"><div class="Normal"><br />But before filing the challan sheet in the case, for some unknown reasons the police authorities ordered another inquiry in the case. This inquiry was conducted by SP(D) Vijay Kumar in August 2003. In his inquiry report SP Vijay Kumar dropped the names of six main accused and indicted two junior officials Sikander Singh, head constable and Sukhminder Singh, constable, holding them solely responsible for misappropriation.<br /><br />The police filed challan against Sukhminder and Sikander. But at the time of framing charges last month, the judge was astonished for the flimsy prosecution story which levelled allegations of embezzlement against the junior officials and absolved main culprits.<br /><br />The judge held that though there were sufficient reasons in the inquiry report of SP (H), conducted in August 2002, while implicating the all eight officials in the cheating case but no reasons was given in the SP (D) inquiry, conducted in August 2003, while abdicating the six senior officials of charges.<br /><br />There is no evidence on record which could hold the allegations of cheating prima-facie true against Sikander and Sukhminder, observed the judge, while there is substantial evidence to prove the involvement of the six abdicated officials. The Judge observed that there was no reason in the inquiry report of the SP(D) which absolved the six accused .<br /><br />The judge held that police claimed to have recovered the embezzled amount from Sikander and Sukhmander but the cash was never produced in the court as case property. Neither the police showed on record from where the cash was recovered and where it was deposited.<br /><br />Criticising police''s role in the case, while the judge discharged Sikander and Sukhmander, using his special power, the court ordered the summoning all other six accused who were absolved in police inquiry.<br /><br /><formid=367815></formid=367815></div> </div>