SANT KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the CBI.

(2.) The petitioner, who is an accused for offence under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(l)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and also under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, prays for anticipatory bail expressing apprehension of his arrest in connection with R.C. Case No.5(A)/2005- A.H.D.(R).

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the case of the CBI, the petitioner's father, presently working as Division Engineer, Telecom. Dumka, while functioning in different capacities, in the Department of Telecom. Government of India and B.S.N.L., acquired total assets worth Rs. 1,83,93,998/- (immovable worth Rs. 1,72,00,000/-) and (movable worth Rs. 11.93,998/-) during 1990 to February 2005 by corrupt or illegal means, as against likely savings of Rs. 51,73,671/- and thereby acquired assets of worth of Rs. 1,32,20,327/- which is disproportionate to his known source of income, for which petitioner's father, namely, Banshi Lai failed to give satisfactory explanation and hence, a case was lodged against Banshi Lai, father of the petitioner, but the petitioner was never made named accused in the first information report, however, the petitioner in course of the investigation, was made accused, on the allegation that he abetted his father in acquiring the assets, which were found disproportionate to his income but the entire allegations are false and as a matter of fact, the petitioner was only aged about 10 years in the year 1990 and subsequently, he became an Electric Engineer and while he was pursuing his study, he used to give tuition to the Students and thereby, earned a sum of Rs. 2,16,760/- till March 2003 and after passing out, he started his consull.ancy services, as Electronics Engineer and during the year 2003-04, he earned Rs. 49,760/- and subsequently, started Hotel business under the partnership with his mother, by taking loan from the Allahabad Bank of Rs. 45,00,000/- and in due course of time, value of the Hotel was assessed by (lie registered valuer and also by the National Insurance Company, at Rs. 80,00.000/-, but the CBI has shown the value of the Hotel much more without any basis and that said Hotel business was being run under the partnership, which had itself independent identity and even the Income Tax Return was separately filed and, therefore, its income cannot be clubbed with the income of his father, but the CBI by clubbing the income, has also made the petitioner accused, on the plea that the petitioner abetted his father to acquire the property by illegal and unfair means.