P. PANDIAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal arises out of conviction and sentence imposed by the learned XIV Additional Special Judge (CBI Cases), XIV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai in C.C. No.367 of 2009, dtd. 26/9/2019, wherein the Appellant was convicted for offence under Sec. 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo four years' Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a Fine of Rs.3,00,000,.00 in default, to undergo one year Simple Imprisonment.

(2.) The case of the Prosecution is that the Appellant joined in Employees Provident Fund Organization, Chennai, as Lower Division Clerk on 10/7/1975, promoted as Upper Division Clerk on 18/9/1980, promoted as Head Clerk on 14/5/1995 and further promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer on 21/10/2005. Subsequently, he has been redesignated as Enforcement Officer on 28/5/2007 and was working as Enforcement Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Chennai. The Appellant married one Vennila on 24/5/1981, who is a matriculate and a housewife. The Appellant has two sons namely, P. Pranesh Kumar and P. Mahesh.

(3.) The Respondent received reliable information about Appellant, and his Family Members acquired assets disproportionate to his income, Preliminary Enquiry conducted, thereafter, FIR registered and the Check-period was fixed for the period from 1/1/2002 to 30/9/2006. During investigation, the Appellant and his Family Members were found in possession of immovable and movable assets at the beginning of the Check-period to the tune of Rs.10,64,404,.00 which is reflected in Statement 'A'; at the end of Check-period, the Appellant and his Family Members were found in possession of immovable and movable assets to the tune of Rs.70,25,867,.00 which is reflected in statement 'B'; during the Check-period, the Appellant and his Family Members had income to the tune of Rs.56,97,574.00 from all known source of income, which is reflected in Statement 'C' and during the Check-period, the Appellant and his Family Members incurred a total expenditure of Rs.22,50,406,.00 which is reflected in Statement 'D'. Thus, the Appellant was found to amass wealth and assets, which are disproportionate to his known source of income, to an extent of Rs.25,16,295,.00 which is around 44.16%.