Comply with Section 19 (b) provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women and Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, or face contempt proceedings.
The Orissa High Court has set aside the conviction of a doctor held by the Vigilance sleuths 25 years back, saying that the prosecution case suffers from serious infirmities.
Pradeepta Kumar Praharaj, an Assistant Surgeon in Project Hospital, Khatiguda in the district of Nabarangpur, had been caught red handed allegedly accepting Rs 300 bribe from the complainant for issuing his medico-legal opinion in 1998.
The trial Court found the accused of the offences in 22 March 2007 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the 1988 Act.
“The prosecution case suffers from serious infirmities. The reasoning assigned by the trial Court is faulty and genuine material evidence available on record in favour of the appellant has been overlooked and it appears that the impugned judgment is one-sided in favour of the prosecution,” the single-bench judge Justice SK Sahoo ruled in the verdict.
There is no sufficient, cogent and reliable evidence available on record to establish the guilt of the appellant. In the absence of any clinching evidence relating to the demand and acceptance of the bribe money by the appellant, no guilt can be fastened upon him in a callous manner.
In the circumstances, since the guilt of the appellant has not been established beyond all reasonable doubt, I am constrained to give benefit of doubt to the appellant.
The impugned judgment and order of conviction of the appellant and the sentence passed thereunder is hereby set aside and the appellant is acquitted of all the charges. Justice Sahoo concluded in the judgment.