He himself would have never thought that a bribe of Rs. 3 Lakhs could land him into trouble after 15 years. Special Judge RP Pandey, convicted 84-year-old Sukhram on charges of misusing his official position in awarding the contract and causing loss to the state exchequer, is likely to decide on quantum of sentence to him on Saturday.
The corruption case dates back to year 1996, when the telecom ministry was under Sukhram. Sukhram had awarded private firm Haryana Telecom Limited (HTL) a contract worth Rs 30 crore to supply 3.5 Lakh Conductor Kilometers (LCKM) of Polythene Insulated Jelly Filled (PIJF) cables to the telecom department.
Sukhram had been put on trial along with HTL chairman Devinder Singh Choudhary who died during the trial.
"Sukhram also obtained (illegal) gratification other than legal remunerations from Choudhary as a motive or reward for showing the favour to the said firm (HTL)," the judge said.
"It is not the prosecution case that Sukhram got only this much amount in this deal which runs into crores of rupees. The prosecution case is that the amount of Rs 3 lakh which was recovered from him was the bribe money.
"It is a matter of common knowledge that it is virtually impossible to get any direct evidence where both i.e bribe giver and the person who takes the bribe, worked in joint concert," ASJ Pandey said in his 188-page order.
The corruption case dates back to year 1996, when the telecom ministry was under Sukhram. Sukhram had awarded private firm Haryana Telecom Limited (HTL) a contract worth Rs 30 crore to supply 3.5 Lakh Conductor Kilometers (LCKM) of Polythene Insulated Jelly Filled (PIJF) cables to the telecom department.
Sukhram had been put on trial along with HTL chairman Devinder Singh Choudhary who died during the trial.
"Sukhram also obtained (illegal) gratification other than legal remunerations from Choudhary as a motive or reward for showing the favour to the said firm (HTL)," the judge said.
"It is not the prosecution case that Sukhram got only this much amount in this deal which runs into crores of rupees. The prosecution case is that the amount of Rs 3 lakh which was recovered from him was the bribe money.
"It is a matter of common knowledge that it is virtually impossible to get any direct evidence where both i.e bribe giver and the person who takes the bribe, worked in joint concert," ASJ Pandey said in his 188-page order.
No comments:
Post a Comment