H.N. Sarma, J.

1. This Appeal is filed under Section 27 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused/appellant vide judgment and order dated 9-7-1979 passed by learned Special Magistrate, Kamrup, Assam in Special Case No. 52(C)/94 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, further imprisonment for 3 (three) months.

2. Heard Mr. J.M. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Katakey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. D.K. Das, learned standing counsel, CB1 appearing for the respondent.

3. On the basis of an information lodged by the Superintendent of Police, CBI dated 24-4-1993 R.C. Case No. 9(A)/93 SH was registered by police wherein it has been alleged that credible information has been received that the accused/appellant serving as the Assistant Commercial Manager (Marketing & Sales), N.F. Railway, Maligaon has amassed huge wealth by corrupt and dishonest means during his service period from 1983-93, while working in different capacities at different places, which is grossly disproportionate to his known source of income also stating therein certain specific facts.

4. The case Under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') was registered against the accused/appellant. The case was investigated by one Sri K.C. Choudhury, Inspector of CBI. PW-28 who read the statement of witnesses and also seized a large number of documents and having found a prima-facie case against the accused/appellant submitted charge-sheet against him, being charge-sheet No. 16, dated 30-9-1994.

5. On the basis of the materials produced by the investigating agency, the learned Special Judge framed charges against the accused under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Act, vide order dated 25-9-1995, but accused denied the said charges.

6. The case against the accused as unfolded by the prosecution inter alia is that the accused joined as Commercial Apprentice in Indian Railways and retired as Commercial Manager on 30-4-1994. The accused started acquiring assets both movable and immovable including one RCC building, one Maruti van, gold ornaments and other valuable household goods costing Rs. 8,51,332/- by corrupt means while he was serving in the capacity as the Assistant Commercial Manager, Maligaon, Guwahati w.e.f. 1983-93, which was disproportionate to his known source of income.

7. The prosecution for the purpose of calculating income expenditure and assets of the accused took into account the period from 12-4-1985 to 29-4-1993 as check period. It is also alleged that the total income from his known source of income is Rs. 5,54,036/- and total expenditure shown by the accused is Rs. 2,57,377/-. Accordingly taking into account of the income and expenditure and assets, it was found that during the said period the accused acquired assets worth Rs. 5,08,2006/- which is disproportionate to his known source of income.

8. In order to establish their case the prosecution examined as many as 28 witnesses who proved as many as 77 numbers of exhibits. The statement of the accused Under Section 313 Cr. P.C. was also recorded. Defence also examined 3 witnesses in support of his case.

9. The defence of the accused was of total denial so far it relates to the gold ornaments alleged to be under possession of the accused which was seized by Ext. 36, in box marked R alleging that the same belongs to his wife and also denied the marriage expenditures of his daughter allegedly made by him. The further defence of the accused is that his son is staying with him, who is serving as Engineer in the OIL, also contributed his income.

10. According to the accuse