Mumbai: Observing that corruption in the public sector is akin to cancer in a civilised society and must be curbed effectively, a court recently convicted and sentenced a now 52-year-old BMC ward officer to four years of rigorous imprisonment for accepting a bribe of Rs 2 lakh from an ad agency, reports Rebecca Samervel.The agency managed billboards and sought a “no dues” certificate.Finding the accused, Pravin Keshav Singh, guilty, the judge said that mere dependency of family can’t be a ground for a lenient sentence. “A suitable deterrent sentence should be awarded …so that not only the accused but other potential wrongdoers receive a clear message,” said the judge.In the case of a BMC ward officer convicted on taking Rs 2 lakh bribe, public prosecutor Ramesh Siroya argued that a deterrent sentence should be awarded to the accused, in line with the govt’s policy ofzero tolerance towards corruption.”The tainted money, i.e., the seized cash amount of Rs 2 lakh, be returned to Faisal Rashid, owner of ‘De Gens’ Products Company, after the appeal period is over,” said special judge Satyanarayan R Navander.Ms De Zens, an advertisement firm owning multiple hoardings across Mumbai, was represented by its proprietor, Faisal Rashid, and its marketing manager, Sanjay Bidwe. The company was obligated to remit advertisement tax to BMC for these hoardings, with assessment conducted by the relevant BMC ward office based on the hoarding’s location.Certain hoardings were situated within the Worli area, falling under the jurisdiction of the BMC’s ‘G-South’ Ward. The accused held a position of authority within the Assessment Department of this ward and was authorised to issue ‘No Dues Certificates’ upon the satisfactory payment of requisite taxes by the assessee.While M/s. De Zens duly discharged its tax obligations for the hoardings located in Worli, the corresponding ‘No Dues Certificate’ was not issued. Bidwe bore the responsibility for ensuring tax payments and securing this certificate, which was essential for subsequent regulatory approvals. Despite repeated follow-up efforts, the issuance of the certificate remained pending with the accused. Approximately 10 days prior to the formal lodging of the complaint, the accused demanded a bribe of Rs four lakh in exchange for the issuance of the certificate. Rashid consented to pay Rs 2 lakh to mitigate potential disruptions.