ROUNAK ALI HAZARIKA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court proceedings were conducted partly through physical mode and partly through Video-Conference due to Covid-19 pandemic.

(2.) This is an application filed under sec. 439 Cr.P.C., seeking bail of the accused -petitioner, namely, Rounak Ali Hazarika, in connection with Vigilance PS Case No. 06/2021 under Ss. 12, 13 (1)(a)(b)/13(2) of the PC Act (as amended) 1988, read with Sec. 3(c)/4(1)/5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and Sec. 120 B IPC.

(3.) The fact of the case, as appears from the FIR, is that on receipt of a compliant by the C.M.'s Vigilance Cell regarding disproportionate assets amassed by the petitioner, an IPS Officer, working as Deputy Inspector General of Police (Border), Assam, a preliminary enquiry and, thereafter, a regular enquiry were held, vide Case RE. No.02/2021. During the aforesaid enquiry, it was found that the petitioner had amassed moveable and immovable properties to the tune of Rs. 1,01,36,401.00 during the period from 1992 to 2021. It was found during the enquiry that the income of the petitioner along with his wife from all legal sources is to the tune of Rs. 1,74,65,529.00 approximately. It is also found during the enquiry that the petitioner had incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,61,18,431.00 approximately under different heads including the educational expenditure of his children, for an amount of Rs. 1,74,12,974.00. The FIR also discloses that after computation of his assets, income and expenditure, it is found that the income of the petitioner and his wife from all legal sources is approximately to the tune of Rs. 1,74,65,529.00 and expenditure is approximately to the tune of Rs. 3,61,18,431.00. Thus, his likely savings is approximately Rs.(-) 1,86,52,902.00. Against his likely saving of Rs.(-) 1,86,52.902 he possessed assets to the tune of Rs.1,01,36,401.00 approximately. Thus, he possessed disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs. 2,87,89,303.00 against his known sources of income. The FIR further contains an allegation that the vehicle used by the petitioner, bearing registration No.DL-8CCZ/5000 (Mercedes), is registered in the name of one Raman Kumar of Delhi, and the same is suspected to have been purchased by the petitioner under a secret agreement without changing the registration number. It has further been stated in the FIR that although the petitioner stated that his wife, being working as Financial Adviser of a Insurance Company, earns commissions, incentives, etc., but he could not provide the total amount of the income of his wife. His wife was appointed as such about 3/4 years back although the landed properties acquired by her are prior to such assignment, thereby implying that the properties in the name of the wife of the petitioner were, in-fact, purchased by the petitioner. It has also been specifically alleged in the FIR that during the period from 2019 to 2021, an amount of Rs. 3,07,33,587.95 was credited in the account of the petitioner and out of this amount, there was a cash deposit of Rs. 59,72,150/-, while he was posted at Bongaigaon. There is also findings recorded in the enquiry report, which have been stated in the FIR, that cash deposits were made in the account of the daughter of the petitioner several times by one Afroz Ahmed at the rate of Rs.2 - 3 lakhs each time, which he had received from one Farid Ali for depositing in the account of the daughter of the petitioner. There is also materials found during the enquiry to show that one Kamal Sonowal also deposited cash amount in the account of the daughter of the petitioner several times which, he stated during his examination, to be towards the repayment of the loan of Rs. 10 lakhs, which he had taken from the petitioner.