Archive · 25 Sep 2026
Mandla Municipal Officer Allegedly Caught Taking ₹2 Lakh Bribe
Officials from the Lokayukta said they caught a municipal officer in Mandla allegedly accepting a bribe.
The officer was identified as Gajanan Nafde.
A contractor said the officer wanted money to release a payment that was still pending.
The pending payment was for supplies delivered to the municipality.
The contractor first reported an alleged demand of ₹4 lakh.
During an official verification, the officer allegedly agreed to accept ₹2 lakh.
Investigators then conducted a trap at the municipal office.
Legal action was started under India’s anti-corruption law.
Lokayukta officials allegedly caught Mandla Chief Municipal Officer Gajanan Nafde accepting ₹2 lakh on September 25.
The money was allegedly sought to release ₹15 lakh owed for supplies provided to the municipality.
Contractor Gyanchand Ben had reported that Nafde initially demanded ₹4 lakh for clearing the payment.
Ben’s wife’s firm had supplied LED lights and alum, while Ben supplied pipe joints and water coolers.
Action was initiated under Sections 7, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
- Who
- Mandla Chief Municipal Officer Gajanan Nafde and contractor Gyanchand Ben were central to the case; Lokayukta officials conducted the operation.
- What
- Nafde was allegedly caught accepting ₹2 lakh in connection with releasing a municipal payment.
- When
- September 25; the articles do not specify the year.
- Where
- Mandla Municipal Council office in Madhya Pradesh.
- Why
- The money was allegedly sought to release ₹15 lakh pending for supplies provided to the municipality.
- Accused official
- Gajanan Nafde, Chief Municipal Officer of the Mandla Municipal Council
- Alleged bribe
- ₹2 lakh
- Initially alleged demand
- ₹4 lakh
- Pending payment
- ₹15 lakh for supplies to the municipality
- Complainant
- Government contractor Gyanchand Ben
- Trap location
- Mandla Municipal Council office
- Legal provisions
- Sections 7, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Reported discrepancy
- The report described ₹4 lakh as 12% of a payment, although 12% of ₹39.23 lakh is approximately ₹4.71 lakh.