The Court held that the order on charge was passed without application of mind by ignoring the clinching evidence available on record in favour of the petitioners.

SURESH KAIT, J.

1. By way of the present petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’), both the petitioners have challenged the order on charge dated 01.05.2014 and order dated 26.05.2014 whereby charges against the petitioners were framed as under:

“That you Smt. Rekha Nambiar being the wife of A-1 Ramesh Nambiar, and you A-3 Bhojraj Teli being the person In-charge of M/s. HYT Group of Companies during the period 14.10.1991 to 26.02.2010 instigated / intentionally aided by your acts and illegal omissions Shri Ramesh Nambiar acquiring assets to the tune of Rs.2,08,38,172.62 which were disproportionate to his known sources of income and thereby abetted the commission of offence u/s 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act punishable u/s 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by Ramesh Nambiar and thereby committed offence u/s 109 IPC r/w Sec. 13 (1)(e) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and within my cognizance and jurisdiction.”

2. Since, both the petitions arise from the same order, this Court has decided to dispose of these petitions by way of this common judgment.

3. The case against the petitioners was registered on 22.02.2010, on the basis of a source information, against accused No.1/Ramesh Nambiar, husband of accused No. 2 Rekha Nambiar (petitioner in W.P.(CRL) No. 1432/2014 ) along with accused No. 3 Bhojraj Teli (petitioner in CRL.M.C. No. 4781/2014) Managing Director of M/s. HYT Group of Companies, Naveen Patil and Rekha Nambiar under Sections 13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’) and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) on the allegations that accused Ramesh Nambiar while posted and functioning as AGM (Sport), Air India at New Delhi and other places, being a public servant, amassed assets worth about Rs.2,39,21,165/- during the period from 14.10.1991 to 30.06.1999 in his name, in the name of his wife, i.e., petitioner Rekha Nambiar and his family members, which were disproportionate to his known sources of income.

4. The matter was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (‘CBI’), whereby it was disclosed that accused Ramesh Nambiar joined Air India on 14.10.1991 as Sport Assistant at New Delhi. During the entire period of his office, he remained posted in Sport Division at Delhi in different capacities. During the period from September, 1995 to March, 1996, he remained posted as Assistant Private Secretary to the then Minister of State for Railways on deputation. Subsequently, during the period from March, 1998, he remained posted as Additional Private Secretary to the then Textile Minister on deputation. Thereafter, he was promoted as AGM (Sports) on 01.04.2009 and has been continuing as such since then.

5. It was further disclosed that Ramesh Nambiar married to petitioner Rekha Nambiar on 15.09.1994, daughter of late Sh. Gopalan Radhakrishnan, retired AGM, State Bank of India, Mumbai sometimes in 2000. During 2001, Sh. Gopalan went to Sharjah and worked there as Banking Consultant and thereafter worked in Real Estate business at Dubai and had income apart from his pension.

6. For calculating the disproportionate assets of accused No.1 Ramesh Nambiar, the check period has been taken from 14.10.1991 to 26.02.2010. Accordingly, the investigation disclosed that source of income of accused Ramesh Nambiar was salary including perks, income from selling house property, income as interest on Bank accounts and dividend, income from investment etc. The source of income of petitioner Rekha Nambiar was salary from Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank, income from selling house property, income as interest from Bank accounts, dividend income from investment and consultancy fee etc. The income of Master Rishab Nambiar, son of accused Ramesh Nambiar is from interest on his Bank accounts and dividend income from investment. Thus, the total income of accused Ramesh Nambiar, his wife petitioner R