V.JAYANANDNAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the first accused in the case registered as VC. 08/13/TSR by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Thrissur under Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') and under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, as revealed from Ext.P1 First Information Report (FIR), is as follows: The petitioner was the Commercial Tax Intelligence Officer at Thrissur. On 03.02.2010, the petitioner and his team conducted an inspection at the business premises of M/s.Nano Excel Enterprises Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'). During the inspection, they seized Rs.36,00,000/- of cash and the records of the company. The sales turnover of the company showed that it had evaded tax to the tune of Rs.11,01,84,176/- and it was liable to remit double that amount under Section 67 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short 'the KVAT Act'). The second accused, a lawyer, appeared before the petitioner on behalf of the company and he persuaded the petitioner for an amicable settlement of the matter. The third accused was the Director of the company. Accused 1 to 3 entered into a conspiracy and pursuant to such conspiracy, an amicable settlement was fixed on 09.02.2010. On that day, at Hotel Pearl Regency in Thrissur, the second and the third accused gave the petitioner one and a half crore rupees as bribe. Accordingly, the maximum compounding tax which could have been collected was not levied from the company and as a result, the company obtained pecuniary advantage. The petitioner also returned the records to the company without proper verification of the accounts. Thus, the petitioner abused his official position and conspired with the second and the third accused and committed criminal misconduct.

(3.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the relief of quashing Ext.P1 FIR.