Non-Compliance with Section 82 Cr.P.C. Renders Proclamation Proceedings Null and Void: P&H High Court Delhi High Court Declines Mandamus to Speaker for Special Assembly Session to Table CAG Reports Doctors Cannot Be Expected to Investigate Victim's Age in the Absence of Prima Facie Doubt: Kerala High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Bombay HC Grants Bail to Drunk Driving Accused; Orders Public Awareness Campaign as a Condition Burden of Proof in Declaratory Suits Lies Squarely on the Plaintiffs: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Church Property Dispute Rajasthan High Court Puts Mass Transfer Orders of Panchayat Officials on Hold Physical Disabilities Cannot Be Ignored Based on Employment Continuity: Kerala High Court Awards ₹9.62 Lakh to Teacher Suffering Permanent Disability Local Commissioner Appointment is Not a Right, But a Discretionary Power of the Court: P&H HC Allegations of Fraud Insufficient to Bar Arbitration in Trademark Dispute: Madras High Court Section 138 N.I. Act | Failure to Prove Legally Enforceable Debt Leads to Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case: Karnataka High Court Deputationists Have No Vested Right to Continue in Borrowing Department: Andhra Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court: Male Children Can't Claim Maintenance Post-Majority Under PWDV Act A Right Once Accrued Cannot Be Retrospectively Barred by Amended Limitation Provisions: Supreme Court Assessment order under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act declared void due to lack of proper authorization and adherence to Section 153C procedures: P&H High Court Criminal Law Cannot Be Used to Convert Civil Disputes Into Criminal Allegations Without Prima Facie Evidence: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Employer-Employee Dispute Marriage Lasted 3 Days, But Dowry Harassment Proved Beyond Doubt—Conviction Upheld Under Section 498A IPC: Supreme Court Election Petition Dismissed: Petitioner Fails to Establish Locus Standi and Cause of Action: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Income tax returns not a foolproof defence against a charge of acquisition of assets disproportionate under the PC – SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


October 08, 2021

The first respondent is a Civil Servant of the Indian Revenue Services. She is presently working as Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit) at Hyderabad. The second respondent is the spouse of the first respondent, and was also a Civil servant. They are alleged to have acquired assets/pecuniary advantage to the extent of Rs 5,95,58,322. Disproportionate Assets1 during the check period were computed at Rs 1,10,81,692, which is 22.86 per cent of the total income earned by them. On the basis of the FIR dated 20 September 2017, the CBI ACB Chennai registered a case2 against the respondents for offences punishable under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the PC Act and Section 109 of the IPC.  the respondents filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashing of the FIR. the Telangana High Court allowed the respondents’ writ petition by its impugned judgement dated 11 February 2020 and quashed the FIR, and set aside all proceedings initiated pursuant to it. Appellants moved to Apex Court against this quashing. Two questions has been arose to decide: (i) whether the CBI is mandatorily required to conduct a Preliminary Enquiry before the registration of an FIR in every case involving claims of alleged corruption against public servants;  and (ii) whether the judgment of the High Court to quash the FIR can be sustained in the present case. Both questions has been answered in “NO”. Held that A Preliminary Enquiry is not mandatory when the information received discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Even when it is conducted, the scope of a Preliminary Enquiry is not to ascertain the veracity of the information, but only whether it reveals the commission. Even as per CBI Manual a Preliminary Enquiry is not mandatory in all cases which involve allegations of corruption. When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused and the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether the allegations in the FIR disclose commission of a offence or not and a court cannot conduct a mini-trial at the stage of framing of charges and income tax returns and the assessments orders passed thereon, would not constitute a foolproof defence against a charge of acquisition of assets disproportionate to the known lawful sources of income as contemplated under the PC Act. FIR quashing order has been set aside and appeal allowed. 

Central Bureau of Investigation (CB) and Anr.

Versus   

Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi@ T. H. Vijayalakshmi and Anr.  

View Judgement

Similar News