Back
2003 Supreme(AP) 1282
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
Surya Sankaram Karri, Chief Commercial Inspector, S.E.Railway, vizianagaram, A.P. - Appellant
Versus
State Inspector of Police, SPE/cbi/ visakhapatnam - Respondent
Decided On : 10-31-03
Headnote:
Prevention of corruption Act – Section 13 – Possessing disproportionate –Rigorous imprisonment – Gravamen of charge is that the appellant worked as Assistant Station Master in the South Eastern Railway, Vizianagaram and as commercial Inspector from and as Senior Commercial inspector and was later promoted as Chief Commercial inspector and was working – He has wife three sons and a daughter was married – While eldest son is working in South Eastern Railways as Senior Ticket collector second son is working as lecture in GITAM Engineering College, viskhapatnam and third son of appellant is working as Assistant Engineer, visakhapatnam Steel Plant at relevant point of time – Neither appellant nor his wife inherited any immovable property – Held, Whereas total expenditure incurred by him during the period is taken to be after deducting the total expenditure incurred by accused during relevant period from total income received by him, an aggregate sum of available with him whereas total assets of accused amounted accused is possessing assets worth excess of surplus income available to him minus Since excess was comparatively small less than ten per cent of total income applying dicta laid down by apex court it can be held that appellant- accused did not possess any assets disproportionate to his known source of income during period of check –Appeal is allowed.
( 1 ) THE appellant herein was tried by the special Judge for C. B. I. Cases, visakhapatnam, in C. C. No. 5. /1996 on the charge that he was possessing disproportionate assets worth Rs. 8,24,738. 90 than his known sources of income and the learned Special Judge for C. B. I. Cases (for short the Special Judge ) found the appellant guilty of the said charge and convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption act and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine-of Rs. 4,00,000. 00 in default to suffer simple Imprisonment for one year.
( 2 ) THE gravamen of the charge is that the appellant worked as Assistant Station Master in the South Eastern Railway, Vizianagaram from 16-12-196 1/02/1984 and as commercial Inspector from February 1984 to July 1986 and as Senior Commercial inspector from July 198 6/12/1993 and was later promoted as Chief Commercial inspector and was working as such from december 1993. He has wife, three sons and a daughter. The daughter was married in the year 1978. While the eldest son is working in the South Eastern Railways as Senior Ticket collector, the second son is working as lecture in GITAM Engineering College, viskhapatnam and the third son of the appellant is working as Assistant Engineer, visakhapatnam Steel Plant at the relevant point of time. Neither the appellant nor his wife inherited any immovable property.
( 3 ) ON 9-8-1994, the Inspector of Police c. B. I. , Visakhapatnam conducted simultaneous raids on the houses of the accused and his third son, i. e. K. Srinivas (D. W. 3 ). The check pertains to the period from 1-1-1986 to 9-8-1994. In the raids, the c. B. I, personnel found that the accused and his family members had a total income of rs. 6,73,203. 69 including loans and advances obtained during the said check period and that they had spent an amount of rs. 3,31,068. 75 but the accused and his family members acquired movable and immovable assets worth Rs. 1 1,66,87,84 during the check period. Thus, it is alleged that the accused was in possession of assets and pecuniary resources in his name and in the name of his wife worth Rs. 8,24,738. 90 disproportionate to his known source of income as on 9-8-1994. According to the prosecution, the appellant could not account for the said disproportionate income satisfactorily. Therefore, the C. B. I. personnel having come to the conclusion that the appellant acquired the said properties and pecuniary resources by dubious means or through corrupt practices, laid charge sheet against him for the offence punishable under Section 13 (l) (e) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of corruption Act, after obtaining necessary sanction form the competent authority, i. e. , senior Divisional Commercial Manager, south Eastern Railway, Waltair.
( 4 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the income of the appellant during the check period was Rs. 6,73,203. 69, the expenditure is rs. 3,31,068. 75 whereas the assets possessed by him and his wife are worth rs. l 1,66,863-84. For the purpose of convenience the details of income, expenditure and assets are reproduced as hereunder: income sl. No. Item of Income amount (Rs.) 1. Net Salary 1,49,148. 20 2. GPF withdrawal 21,600. 00 3. S. E. Railway Co-op Loan 25,000. 00 4. Loan from G. V. Ramana 20,000. 00 5. Assistance from son 8,000. 00 sl. No item of Income amount (Rs.) 6. Rental income on house (Plot No. 10, Sidhaftha colony, Vizianagaram) 88,318. 00 7. Hand Loans availed by his wife 1,25,400. 00 8. Income received by his wife from business and other sources 1,22,552. 00 9. Loan from M/s Pusapati Finance (by his wife) 1,10,000. 00 10. Brokerage from NFCL 270. 00 11. Interest from NFCL on debentures 97. 00 12. Dividends on NFCL equity shares 348. 49 13. M/s. Swamy Chits Lucky draw 2,000. 00 total 6,72,733. 69 expenditure s. No. Item of Expenditure amount (Rs.) 1. Contribution to ULIP 24,000. 00 2. Donatio
