MADHAB BARTHAKUR Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. K. Aganval, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. D. K. Das, learned Standing Counsel, C. B. I. , appearing on behalf of the opposite party.

(2.) WITH the help of this criminal revision, the accused-petitioner has put to challenge the order, dated 29-11-2006, passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, guwahati, Assam, in Misc. Case 33/2006, which arose out of Special Case No. 63/2004. The ground of challenge is that the impugned order is not supported by any provisions of law contained in that behalf and also that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, a direction to the effect that if the accused-petitioner were held guilty of the offences, which form the subject-matter of trial, then, the entire re-invested money, with all benefits accruing thereto, would stand confiscated to the state. It is also contended by Mr. Aganval that since the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, makes no provisions for confiscation following trial of a person under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Court cannot direct confiscation of property of persons tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) IN order to correctly appreciate the circumstances, which have led to the passing of the impugned order, the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow :-