Ex-ACB Inspector Gets Perjury Notice For Allegedly Giving False Evidence To Shield Bribery Accused

A special court in Ahmedabad has issued a perjury notice to former Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) police inspector Dipak Vyas for allegedly giving false evidence on oath during the trial of a 2008 bribery case in an apparent attempt to shield an accused.

The notice was issued under Section 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) while the court convicted three alleged mediators in the case and sentenced them to two years in prison.

₹5 Lakh Bribe Case Dates Back To 2008

The case dates back to July 2008, when the ACB allegedly caught then assistant commissioner of land development N J Nayak accepting a ₹5 lakh bribe.

Three alleged mediators — Arun Patel, Purushottam Chimnani and Vipul Patel — were also arrested in connection with the case.

The complainant, Gopiram Gupta, managing director of Narayani Farm Pvt Ltd, had alleged that Nayak demanded the bribe in connection with his agriculturist status and regularisation of a parcel of land.

Vyas was the ACB trapping officer in the case.

Nayak died in 2024. The three alleged mediators were convicted by Special Judge B B Jadav earlier this week and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

Court Finds Deposition Contrary To Evidence

While delivering the verdict, the court took exception to Vyas' deposition during cross-examination.

The court noted that FSL analysis and other evidence established that Arun Patel had accepted the bribe amount. However, Vyas allegedly gave a contradictory statement on oath despite being the trapping officer and a public servant.

The court said this appeared to be a deliberate attempt to help the accused and could directly hamper the administration of justice.

"It appears just and proper to initiate proceedings against the trapping officer by issuing a notice under Section 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for allegedly giving false evidence on oath," the court observed.

'Public Will Lose Faith In Justice System'

The court warned that allowing people to place false facts on record to protect offenders could undermine public confidence in the justice system.

"If individuals are allowed to place false facts on record contrary to the truth to shield offenders from criminal liability, and if such persons succeed, the general public will lose faith in the justice delivery system," the court said.

It added that ordinary citizens continue to repose complete faith in the judicial system and that it was the court's "sacred duty" to preserve and uphold that trust.

Vyas has been directed to respond to the notice on August 31.