A special court in Lucknow on Thursday sentenced an 82-year old retired railway employee to a year in prison for having accepted a bribe of₹100 in 1991. .Special Judge Ajai Vikram Singh refused to be lenient with the convict who cited his advanced age to seek lesser punishment. The Court said that being lenient would send a wrong message to the society..The convict, Ram Narayan Verma, told the Court that the incident occurred 32 years ago and that he had already spent two days in jail before being released on bail. .He prayed that his punishment be restricted to the time already spent in jail so that he does not have to serve the remaining sentence..The Court, considering the condition of the convict, the interest of the aggrieved party and the effect on society, determined that two days' imprisonment was not enough and a year in jail would serve the purpose of justice. Hence, the prayer was refused..The Court said that while awarding punishment, it has to consider the condition of the accused, the interest of the aggrieved party and the effect on the society and strike a balance between the three factors..The First Information Report (FIR) against Verma was filed by a retired loco driver of Northern Railways, Ram Kumar Tiwari, in 1992. .He alleged that, after Verma demanded a bribe ₹150 from him for conducting a medical test to compute his pension, he paid him ₹50 and sought a few days to pay the rest..However, since he did not wish to pay the remaining amount, he lodged the complaint after which Verma was caught red handed by the CBI accepting the remaining ₹100.
A special court in Lucknow on Thursday sentenced an 82-year old retired railway employee to a year in prison for having accepted a bribe of₹100 in 1991. .Special Judge Ajai Vikram Singh refused to be lenient with the convict who cited his advanced age to seek lesser punishment. The Court said that being lenient would send a wrong message to the society..The convict, Ram Narayan Verma, told the Court that the incident occurred 32 years ago and that he had already spent two days in jail before being released on bail. .He prayed that his punishment be restricted to the time already spent in jail so that he does not have to serve the remaining sentence..The Court, considering the condition of the convict, the interest of the aggrieved party and the effect on society, determined that two days' imprisonment was not enough and a year in jail would serve the purpose of justice. Hence, the prayer was refused..The Court said that while awarding punishment, it has to consider the condition of the accused, the interest of the aggrieved party and the effect on the society and strike a balance between the three factors..The First Information Report (FIR) against Verma was filed by a retired loco driver of Northern Railways, Ram Kumar Tiwari, in 1992. .He alleged that, after Verma demanded a bribe ₹150 from him for conducting a medical test to compute his pension, he paid him ₹50 and sought a few days to pay the rest..However, since he did not wish to pay the remaining amount, he lodged the complaint after which Verma was caught red handed by the CBI accepting the remaining ₹100.
