2 days ago
Moga SHO, Gunman Held in Alleged Rs 50,000 Bribe Trap
Police officials in Punjab have arrested a station officer and her assistant.
Investigators say they were caught accepting Rs 50,000.
The money was allegedly connected to a narcotics case.
A resident said he was first asked for Rs 1 lakh.
He also alleged that he was threatened with being placed in the case.
Investigators checked the complaint before setting up a trap.
The two accused were arrested in front of official witnesses.
A court will now handle further proceedings, and the allegations have not yet been proven.
Punjab Vigilance Bureau arrested Inspector Sunita Bawa and Home Guard personnel Guravtar Singh.
The arrests followed an alleged bribe demand linked to a narcotics case.
The complainant said the accused initially demanded Rs 1 lakh and threatened to implicate him.
The demand was allegedly reduced to Rs 80,000, with Rs 50,000 allegedly accepted during the trap.
A corruption case has been registered, and further investigation is underway; the allegations remain unproven in court.
- Who
- Inspector Sunita Bawa and Punjab Home Guard personnel Guravtar Singh were arrested.
- What
- They were allegedly caught accepting Rs 50,000 in a corruption trap.
- Where
- At or in connection with Kot Ise Khan police station in Moga district, Punjab.
- When
- The arrests followed registration of an NDPS case on September 22; the article does not specify the arrest date.
- Why
- The Vigilance Bureau alleges the payment was demanded to avoid implicating the complainant in a narcotics case.
Key facts
- Arrested
- Inspector Sunita Bawa and Guravtar Singh
- Agency
- Punjab Vigilance Bureau
- Police station
- Kot Ise Khan police station
- Alleged accepted amount
- Rs 50,000
- Initial demand
- Rs 1 lakh
- Later alleged agreement
- Rs 80,000
- Legal status
- A corruption case was registered; the allegations have not been proven in court.
Quotes
Punjab Vigilance Bureau
The state agency that investigated and conducted the alleged bribery trap
“The accused initially demanded Rs 1 lakh from the complainant and later agreed to accept Rs 80,000.”
thestatesman.com







