ANANDA BEZBARUAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred by the accused petitioner for quashing the impugned order of framing charge and also the proceeding in the Special Case No. 28(c) /90 under S. 5(1)(e) read with S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 pending in the Court of Special Judge, Assam, Gawahati.

(2.) Petitioner was the Deputy General Manager and was officiating in the post of General Manager (Administration), till April, 1988. On 21-3-88 one Shri S.K. Saikia, Superintendent of Police, CBI/ACB, Shillong lodged an FIR on informations, alleging inter alia that the petitioner had amassed huge wealth by dishonest and corrupt means during his service career which was grossly disproportionate to the known source of income of the petitioner. Further, it was alleged that the petitioner had constructed a two storied palatial building in the name of his wife Mrs. Era Bezbaruah and found to be in possession of disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/ - approximately. During the investigation some documents from the house of the accused petitioner including a file of Mrs. Era Bezbaruah (4 nos.) containing documents pertaining to income, land, property (Sl. No. 21), wherein it was disclosed that during the check period, i.e. 1-11-81 to 22-3-88, the petitioner was found in possession of total assets worth of Rs. 8,22,796.53.00 and the petitioner could satisfactorily account for Rs. 2,75,872.51/and thereby total disproportionate assets in possession of the petitioner during the check period was to the tune of Rs. 5,46,923.57.00-. The total break up given in the chargesheet and in the order of charge framed by the learned Special Judge (Annexure VII to the petition) is as follows : The total break up according to the chargesheet submitted by CBI : A) Assets at the begining of check period Rs. 1,27,415.45 /- B) Assets at the close of the check period Rs. 9,50,211.53.00- Assets acquired during the check period (B - A) Rs. 8,22,796.53/- C) Income and other receipts during the check period Rs. 4,21,447.28 /- D) Expenditure during the check period Rs. 1,45,574.77.00- Likely savings (C - D) Rs. 2,75,872.51/- Assets acquired during the check period Rs. 8,22,796.08/- Likely savings - Rs. 2,75,872.51/ - @@@ Total disproportionate assets during the check period Rs. 5,46,923.57/- The total break up according to the order of charges framed by the trial Court : Total assets at the beginning of a) Check period, i.e. Anterior assets Rs. 1 ,27,425.45 / - b) Savings Rs. 1,45,574.77 /- c) Total assets the petitioner should have Rs. 2,72,990.22 / - d) Assets at the close of check period Rs. 10,53,313.02/- Total disproportionate assets the petitioner could not satisfactorily account for Rs. 7,80,322.80/- @@@ ( Expenditure figure was wrongly taken as savings figure)

(3.) In para 10 of the chargesheet the value of the building was included in the assets of the petitioner at the close of the check period amounting Rs. 8,55,065.00- but the said value has been reduced to Rs. 6,81,000.00 (Annexure VI to the petition) after a re-valuation report by the Public Prosecutor, C.B.I. The accused petitioner had shown the value of the house i.e. the cost of construction of the building at Rs. 2,50,000 / - which was based on Assam PWD's prevailing rates while according to the Management of OIL the total remitted cost of the building on 20-4-87 was Rs. 3,14,000.00. The petitioner's assertion was that the land and building as shown in the Income-tax Return of Mrs. Era Bezbaruah, wife of the petitioner (Document 3 of the prosecution) is the exclusive property of petitioner's wife who was an income tax payee. With these materials as indicated above by the accused petitioner the point for consideration for quashing the proceeding are :