T.R.KUNJAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Chhattisgarh through the Anti Corruption Bureau has registered Crime No.5/2006 for offence punishable under Sections 13(1) (e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as 'PC Act') against the petitioner on 16.1.2016 and has seized various articles from the house of the petitioner and also seized currency from the house of his brother-inlaw and jewellery from his sister-in-law's house and has prepared inventory (Annexure P-1) and asked the petitioner to furnish explanation. It is the case of the petitioner that he has submitted the explanation thrice and that is not being considered and the respondent is ready and willing to submit the charge-sheet without considering and deciding the explanation submitted by the petitioner. Therefore, appropriate writ/direction be issued to the respondent/State to consider the explanation regarding currency found in Ramesh Gulati's house (brother-in-law of the petitioner), ownership of petitioner's mother-in-law's house, other explanation with regard to ornaments seized from the house of sister-in-law of the petitioner and house in the name of his mother-in-law before filing of the charge-sheet and to pass a reasoned and speaking order.

(2.) Return has been filed by the respondent/State opposing the averments made in the writ petition stating inter-alia that the writ petition as framed and filed is not maintainable, investigation has been completed and the writ petition is pre-mature. Explanation submitted by sister-in-law of the petitioner has also been considered and investigation is at final stage and on account of interim order, no further steps could be taken.

(3.) Mr.Sourabh Dangi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that investigating officer is duty bound to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner with regard to disproportionate assets before filing of charge-sheet and that appropriate direction is required to be issued to consider such explanation before arriving at any conclusion. He relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of M.P. v. Mohanlal Soni, 2000 6 SCC 338 Central Bureau of Investigation v.Parmila Virendra Kumar Agrawal and others, 2019 SCC Online 1265 and Babubhai v. State of Gujarat, 2010 12 SCC 254