NARAHARI BHOI Vs. REPUBLIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant calls in question the legality and propriety of the judgment and order dated 3.4.2001 passed by the Special Judge (C.B.I.), Bhubaneswar in T.R. 50/13 of 99/94 wherein he convicted the accused -appellant for the offence under Section 13(1) (e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the P.C. Act) and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/ - and in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of six months.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated the prosecution case is that it was learnt from reliable sources that the accused while working as a Messenger in Indian Overseas Bank, Jagannathpur branch under Puri district, during the period 31.3.1978 to 7.8.1992 acquired assets, disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.1,44,040/ - which he would not be able to satisfactorily accounted for. As per the allegation he received salary, advance, house rent etc. to the tune of Rs.3,15,600/ -, approximately spent Rs.1,02,000/ - towards food, clothing, foot -wear etc. and thus against the likely savings of Rs.2,13,600/ -, he acquired assets including one building at village Jaharsasan, and another building at his native village Garajajpur to the tune of Rs.3,57,540/ -, which is disproportionate to the tune of Rs.1,44,040/ - approximately. Since the allegation revealed commission of offence under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the P.C. Act, a case was registered thereunder against the accused under the orders of Superintendent of Police (C.B.I.) S.P.E., Bhubaneswar authorizing Shri G. B. Pati, Inspector of Police (CBI) SPE, Bhubaneswar (P.W.24) to investigate into the case. During investigating, house of the accused was raided, inventory in respect of his assets during check period was made, on evaluation of which the same came to Rs.5,80,567.08. The income of the accused from all legitimate sources during the check period was found to be Rs.3,95,108/ - out of which he spent an amount of Rs.1,71,962/ - and as such his likely savings was Rs.2,23,145/ -. But he was found to have possessed assets worth Rs.5,80,567/ - which was disproportionate to his known sources of income by Rs,3,57,421/ - and when asked, he could not satisfactorily account for the same. Accordingly, after observing all formalities charge sheet was submitted against the accused for the offence under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act.

(3.) TO bring home the charge leveled against the accused, prosecution examined as many as 24 witnesses and exhibited 62 documents. The accused examined 5 witnesses and exhibited 3 documents to establish his plea.