29 in court in connection with corrupt court clerk

29 people were in court today Southwark Crown Court as part of Operation Theemin

29 people were in court today Southwark Crown Court as part of Operation Theemin

First published in News
Last updated
by

A total of 29 people appeared in court today as part of a large investigation into corruption and bribery at Redbridge Magistrates’ Court in 2011.

Karandeep Sanghera, 25, a trainee barrister of Eric Road, Chadwell Heath, court clerk Parminder Ghatora, 31, from Coventry, and Shinthuga Ratnaselvam, 26, of Westernville Gardens in Ilford, have been charged with misconduct in a public office.

A total of 26 others have been charged with perverting the course of justice in connection with Operation Theemin, an investigation into conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office, bribery and perverting the course of justice.

Munir Patel, 24, of Green Lane, Dagenham, was jailed for three years in 2011 for making illegal changes to the computer system at Redbridge Magistrates' Court.

Patel also advised people on how to avoid being summoned to court while working as an administrator.

In 2011, a court heard £53,814 in cash was deposited in Patel’s bank account while another £42,383 payment was transferred into the same account without explanation.

Among those charged with perverting the course of justice are Zain Akthar, 20, a vehicle service worker of The Drive in Ilford, Kashif Hussain, 28, of Rutland Road, Ilford, Amna Lone, 23, of Benton Road in Ilford, and Umaer Zaffer, 27, of Northbrook Road, Ilford, Faisal Hussain, 26, an electrical engineer from Gyllyngdune Gardens in Ilford, and unemployed Hasham Syed, 25, of Levett Gardens in Ilford.

All appeared today at Southwark Crown Court to confirm their names and have been bailed until the next hearing on May 16.

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

NDevoto says...

WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due?
Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?
WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due? Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws? NDevoto
  • Score: 0

11:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

NDevoto wrote:
WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due?
Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?
Spot on, must be a reason?
[quote][p][bold]NDevoto[/bold] wrote: WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due? Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?[/p][/quote]Spot on, must be a reason? Villagecranberry
  • Score: -2

11:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

NDevoto wrote:
WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due?
Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?
Spot on, must be a reason?
[quote][p][bold]NDevoto[/bold] wrote: WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due? Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?[/p][/quote]Spot on, must be a reason? Villagecranberry
  • Score: -3

11:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

NDevoto wrote:
WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due?
Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?
Spot on, must be a reason?
[quote][p][bold]NDevoto[/bold] wrote: WHY WHY WHY are comments STILL open on this site, in cases when trials are due? Can the web masters of this site , assuming anyone is actually in control, please sort out their obligations to the subjudice laws?[/p][/quote]Spot on, must be a reason? Villagecranberry
  • Score: -3

8:51am Fri 28 Feb 14

UKIP-local says...

My question is Why Why Why the internal control systems at the council were so lax that there was ever any possibility of this sort of thing happening. I do not have any idea whether these accusers are guilty and I agree with the sentiment of an earlier post about due process of law and a presumption of innocence.

These high ideals of our English legal system should be preserved because they are unusual in the world and quite rare within Europe. Don't let the politicians convert our system to an EU "inquisitorial" one where accusers have to prove their innocence.
My question is Why Why Why the internal control systems at the council were so lax that there was ever any possibility of this sort of thing happening. I do not have any idea whether these accusers are guilty and I agree with the sentiment of an earlier post about due process of law and a presumption of innocence. These high ideals of our English legal system should be preserved because they are unusual in the world and quite rare within Europe. Don't let the politicians convert our system to an EU "inquisitorial" one where accusers have to prove their innocence. UKIP-local
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree