"I hold that prosecution in present case has been fully successful in making out case against accused O P Sharma that he accepted bribe of Rs 10 lakh from L K Kaul (complainant) in connection with case which was being supervised by him pertaining to hawala transactions involving senior politicians and government servants," special CBI judge Pradeep Chaddah said.
The court held Sharma, the then DIG probing the hawala transaction case, guilty under section 7 and 13 (1) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act pertaining to a public servant demanding and accepting illegal gratification.
The CBI case was that in April 1991 a case under TADA and FERA was registered by the CBI against one Ashfaq Hussain Lone, a deputy chief of intelligence of the Hizbul Mujahideen. The case was being supervised by Sharma. During its probe, the CBI team raided the residential and office premises of industrialist Surendra Jain and his employee Jainendra Jain.
The team seized huge amount of cash, which Sharma said was meant to be passed on to terrorists for funding terror activities. A diary was also seized which contained names of politicians and bureaucrats to whom payments had been allegedly made by Jain.
The CBI submitted that Sharma thereafter started threatening Jains for invoking TADA against them and demanded bribe for not doing so.
CBI said in the charge sheet that Surendra then contacted L K Kaul, who knew Sharma and asked him to intervene. He then agreed to pay him bribe in installments and alongside recorded their conversation with Sharma.
In June 1991, Kaul made a written complaint with the CBI against Sharma after which raiding party reached Sharma's residence in south west Delhi and recovered an airbag containing cash.
Surendra Jain during the trial had deposed that he did not give any money to be paid to the accused officer or ever contacted Kaul to intervene.
New Delhi: A former senior CBI official was Tuesday convicted by a Delhi court for accepting bribe for not invoking TADA against the Jain brothers in the controversial 1991 Jain hawala case.
First Published: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 19:56