J C VERMA Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is ultra vires of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India ? Is the question raised in this writ petition.

(2.) Shorn of all unnecessary details the facts in brief are that the petitioner is a public servant. He started his career as clerk some where in 1940.

(3.) After a break of one year from June 15, 1948 to July 15, 1949 he rejoined Government service as a Statistician with the Ministry of Rehabilitation. After working in various capacities in different departments of the Government of India, he was working as Deputy Commissioner in the Ministry of Agriculture when a case under section 5(1) (e) ofthe Prevention of Corruption Act, was registered against him. After completing the investigation a chargesheet was submitted on July 21, 1977 in the court of Special Judge. It is alleged that the petitioner has been found to be in possession of disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs. 4,86,060.30 P. which he has been unable to explain satisfactorily. has' to be given' an opportunity to satisfactorily account for his pecuniary resources or property said to be disproportionate to his known sources of income, and only when the accused cannot satisfactorily account for the same he can be said to have committed the offence. It is submitted that asking an accused to satisfactorily account for his assets amounts to compelling a person to be a witness against himself which is in violation of clause (3) of Article 20 of the Constitution of India.