CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted.

(2.) S .378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, Rs.1973 Code') enacts the provision for appeal from an order of acquittal. The said provision as it existed prior to 2005 amendment reads:

(3.) SHRI Lalu Prasad Yadav and Smt. Rabri Devi are husband and wife. Both of them have held the office of Chief Minister of the State of Bihar. These appeals concern the period from March 10, 1990 to March 28, 1995 and April 4, 1995 to July 25, 1997 when Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav was the Chief Minister, Bihar. Allegedly for acquisition of assets - both moveable and immoveable - by corrupt or illegal means disproportionate to his known sources of income during the aforesaid period, a first information report (FIR) was lodged by CBI against Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav and also his wife. As a matter of fact, lodgement of FIR was sequel to direction by the Patna High Court to CBI to enquire and scrutinize all cases of excess drawls and expenditure in the Animal Husbandry Department, Government of Bihar during the period 1977-78 to 1995-96. CBI investigated into the matter and on August 19, 1998, a charge - sheet was filed against Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav and Smt. Rabri Devi in the Court of Special Judge, CBI (AHD), Patna. The charges were framed against Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav under S.13(1)(e) read with S.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('PC Act') that during the said period, he acquired assets which were disproportionate to his known sources of income and on 31st March, 1997 he had been in possession of pecuniary resources of property in his name and in the name of his wife and children to the extent of Rs.46,26,827/- which he could not satisfactorily account for. Smt. Rabri Devi was charged under S.109 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with S.13(1)(e) and S.13(2) of the PC Act for abetting her husband in the commission of the said offence. The Court of Special Judge, CBI (AHD), Patna, upon conclusion of trial, vide its judgment dated December 18, 2006 acquitted the accused holding that prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against them.