Saturday, Aug 10, 2002
Saturday, Aug 10, 2002 |
| Southern States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Kerala
By Our Staff Reporter
The judge in his order directed the Director, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram, to submit the inquiry report into the allegations `as expeditiously as possible for further legal action if any.' The judge also said the period of scrutiny for assessing the veracity of the allegations of amassment of illegal wealth shall be fixed as 15 years ending with July 31. The order, however, made it clear that "the registration of crime prior to the assessment of the trustfulness or otherwise of allegations is not warranted by law and a thorough and sincere verification prior to the registration of the crime is a sine qua non of amassment of disproportionate assets.'' The judge issued the order while disposing of two separate petitions filed by K.V. Job of Koonammavu, North Varappuzha in Ernakulam district and Biju Valluvanadan of Panampilly Nagar in Kochi. The two petitions were earlier clubbed together by the judge on July 2 and were forwarded to the Vigilance Director for necessary action. The judge on July 2 had also called for a report from the Director-General of Police and the Vigilance Director on the allegations made by the petitioners that some inquiry was pending with the police on similar allegations against Prof. Thomas and that there was an intelligence report against him (Prof. Thomas). The judge in his order today said he had received a report to the effect from both the authorities that "no such inquiries are pending against the respondent (Prof. Thomas) in respect of similar allegations.'' Apart from allegations of amassing disproportionate wealth, the petitioners have charged Prof. Thomas with abuse of official position in order to procure undue pecuniary advantage by corrupt or illegal means and without public interest. According to the complainants, Prof. Thomas, who hailed from a poor agriculture family, could have amassed wealth of only about Rs. 20 lakhs from his known sources as an MP and a college lecturer. But they alleged that even by conservative estimates, Prof. Thomas is now known to be possessing wealth to the tune of Rs. 20 crores. Even while sharing the concerns on the possibilities of the investigations turning into harassments against the `accused' public servants, the judge said, "merely making some preliminary inquiries upon the receipt of information from an anonymous versions or versions of doubtful reliability for checking up the correctness of the information does amount to collection of evidence and so cannot be regarded as investigation.'' `The offence of amassment of disproportionate assets in deviation to known sources of income is a serious matter to be looked into. It is of dire consequence to the corrupt public servant whose unwarranted desires deeply affect the general public.'' ``It is of dire consequence to the investigating agency also. A balance has to be struck between the act of enhancing the unholy corrupt public servant and the act of avoidance of harassment to the innocent public servant,'' the judge said. The order also made it clear that the necessary guidelines and norms with respect to the investigation or inquiry of the offences of possession of assets disproportionate to the known sources of income shall be fairly and reasonably followed.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
