K. THAVASI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgement dated 19.02.2009 made in Special CC.No.3/2006 by the learned Special Judge-IX Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, thereby (a) convicting and sentencing the 1st Appellant/A1 for the offence under Section 13(1)(e) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to undergo one year Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment, (b) convicting and sentencing the 2nd Appellant/A2 for the offence under Section 109 of IPC read with 13(1)(3) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to undergo one year Simple Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment and (c) directing the Respondent Police to take steps to recover the sum of Rs.9,14,013/- from A1 and A2.

(2.) The charge against the 1st Appellant is that he was in possession of assets in his name and the name of his wife disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.24,42,510/-, which he could not account for. The 2nd Appellant/A2 abetted A1 by allowing A1 to acquire certain properties in the name of A2 and holding the same on behalf of A1 disproportionate to the known sources of A1. The learned Special Judge-IX Additional Sessions Judge, on assessment of evidence, came to the conclusion that the Prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused only to the extent of Rs.9,14,013/- and found them guilty thereof. The Trial Court held that though the accused have proved several sources of income, but failed to maintain proper accounts, however, held that there was no complaint by anyone against the accused that he earned income by misusing his Office.

(3.) The undisputed facts are that A2 married A1 on 10.9.1987. A1 was an MLA from 19.6.1991 to 13.5.1996 representing Andipatti Constituency. Prior to that, he was practising as an Advocate and a part time Lecturer in PMT Arts College at Usilampatti during 1983 to 1986. The accused are from affluent family and at the time of marriage, A2 was presented with 808 grams of gold and an Ambassador Car by her father, besides other household articles.