Former rent collector sentenced to 3-year jail term in bribery case

MUMBAI: A special court constituted under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act sentenced a 60-year-old former employee of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to three years of imprisonment for allegedly demanding ₹26,000 illegal gratification and accepting part of it.

The accused officer, Laxman Pawar, was a rent collector with the North Division ward of the civic body. In 2016, the complainant wanted to transfer the tenancy of a BMC room from his late mother’s name to his name. For this, Pawar allegedly demanded ₹3,5000 to initiate the transfer process and ₹2,500 for site inspection. He then demanded ₹20,000 to complete the file. At this demand, the complainant on ____ (when) approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Mumbai.

The complainant later convinced Pawar to accept ₹10,000 as partial payment. Pawar was caught red-handed ___(when?) in ACB’s trap near an MTNL box outside his office. After Pawar accepted the notes, his hands were tainted with the anthracene powder used by ACB as proof of acceptance of the bribe.

The defence argued that there was no direct evidence of voluntary demand or acceptance, submitting that he had no motive or previous history to demand bribes. Pawar’s advocate maintained that the DVR evidence is not maintainable due to an absence of hash values and procedural lapses.

The court observed that the prosecution proved beyond doubt that Pawar demanded and accepted illegal gratification, considering the oral and documentary evidence. “The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused demanded illegal gratification from the complainant and accepted the bribe amount on 18/04/2016”, said special judge Shashikant E Bangar, in the order passed on Wednesday. The court sentenced him to three years imprisonment and directed him to pay a fine of ₹50,000.

“Though the accused has suffered suspension for more than 10 years and is suffering from serious health issues and allegedly comes from a poor background, these mitigating circumstances would not outweigh the aggravating circumstances that he had demanded and accepted illegal gratification to discharge his public duties for which he was receiving legal,” held the court.