The court has ordered confiscation of four of his properties. Special Judge Vikas Dhul on Friday sentenced Om Prakash Chautala to four years’ imprisonment and ordered his immediate remand. Tihar Jail,
According to prison records, Chautala He is one of seven inmates over the age of 80. There are another 63 between the ages of 70 and 80. Chautala, an 85-year-old prisoner convicted of murder, was the oldest in jail until his sentencing on Friday. Hindustan Times informed of.
Due to his old age and health, Chautala would be entitled to a bed like other prisoners above the age of 70. Older prisoners are also not given any work in the prison factories. “Usually, on the advice of the doctor, we allow beds for elderly prisoners. In his (Chautala’s) case also a bed will be given. The bed is from the jail factory. Apart from this, we also ensure that elderly prisoners have someone inside to take care of them. Prisoners of good conduct who wish to help the elderly are assigned such tasks. This is a task voluntarily assigned by the jail superintendent,” said a mid-level prison official who asked anonymity.
Meanwhile, as per the order passed by the court, 50 lakh fine amount Out of this, Rs 5 lakh will be given to CBI. The court also refused to grant Chautala 10 days to surrender on the request of his lawyer Harsh Sharma.
After finishing the arguments on Thursday, both the sides said that the order of punishment will be pronounced today. During the debate on Thursday, OP Chautala appeared and remained present in the courtroom.
Appearing for OP Chautala, Advocate Harsh Sharma cited medical grounds for the reduced sentence and submitted that Chautala was suffering from polio since birth, and was partially disabled.
Chautala is accused of amassing disproportionate assets from 1993 to 2006. This time is more than 20 years. Meanwhile, he has always cooperated in the investigation, argued Advocate Sharma.
CBI’s Special Public Prosecutor Ajay Gupta opposed the submissions of Chautala’s counsel for grant of concession on grounds of health and age.
The CBI had urged the court to give maximum punishment as it would send a message to the society. “In this case the person is a public figure and giving minimum sentence will send a wrong message. His past history is not clear. This is the second case in which he has been convicted,” the CBI said.
Special Judge (PC Act) Vikas Dhul had last week convicted Chautala and held that the accused had failed to satisfactorily account for such disparity by proving the source or means of his income through which he had made this claim. assets acquired during the period.
“Therefore, the accused Om Prakash Chautala is convicted for the offense under Section 13(1)(e) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Debate on the issue at 10.00 am on 26.05.2022 Keep for the punishment,” the court said.
According to the CBI FIR, Om Prakash Chautala, while serving as the Chief Minister of Haryana during the period from July 24, 1999 to March 5, 2005, in connivance with his family members and others, acquired immovable and movable property more than his own. acquired property. Known lawful sources of income in his name, in the name of his family members and others to the extent of Rs 1,467 crore.
The FIR further states that the accused accumulated huge assets and thousands of acres of land, multi-complexes, palatial residential houses, hotels, farmhouses, business agencies, petrol pumps and other investments all over the country in the form of investments abroad. invested in. Country.
The FIR also stated that besides cash and jewellery, a total of 43 immovable properties were deposited. Apart from the 43 alleged properties listed in the FIR, additional properties were also suspected to be of the accused family.
Additional properties were also investigated to ascertain the connection of the accused family with the said properties.
The chargesheet filed in the case after the conclusion of the investigation stated that accused OP Chautala had acquired both immovable and movable properties which were disproportionate to his known source of income.
disproportionate assets calculated 6,09,79,026 (Six crore nine lakh seventy nine thousand twenty six) and DA (disproportionate assets) percentage was 189.11 percent of their known sources of income. Accordingly, the CBI had filed a charge sheet against the accused u/s 13(2) read with section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
(with inputs from agencies)