+ % INTHEHIGHCOURTOF DELHIAT NEWDELHI PFTTTTON (CJRTMTNALl NO. 871 OF 2010 •Reserved, on.; September,201Q., Date of Decision :gjJ'^teemher, 2010., NAVEENKUMAR . TC Through Mr. SanjayMannandMr. R.K. Pillai, Advocates., VERSUS ^ STATETHR CENTRALBUREAUOF INVESTIGATION...Respondent Through Mr.VikasPahwa,StandingCounsel with Ms. Suchiti Chandra, Advocate. CORAM: . HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESANJrVKHANNA 1. WhetherReportersoflocalpapersmaybe allowed to see the judgment? 2.Tobe referred to the Reporteror not ? 3. Whetherthejudgmentshouldbe reported in the Digest ? S AN.TTV KHANNA, J.: For detailedordersee WritPetition(Crl)7650/2010titledVirender SinghversusCentralBureauofInvestigationpronouncedtoday. vJi NOVEMBER 2010. F (SANJiVKHANNA) • JUDGE Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified W.P(CR1M1NAI.)N0S,765/2010&.B71/2010 ' ' ^ . , ,1..HEH.3HCOUKTOFl>EOaAXNBWDEMI •. _ 3«sna3mfflm^ 3 ^, • • .iF'esci-vedoia: , • , SSeofDecision:i?3ia^6niJ2St-^--- . • .•...., Petitioner • . • VlRENDl®.SINGH_ „ • picihar&aLuthra,Sr;Adyocatc , ; :; , : v^ShMrrAEUragAhluwalia, . A.cb/ocate.' , • • • • ^RSUS GEN-rilAJ.BUREAUOF^NVKSTIGA:!^^^^^pahwa:^di^ounscl' , vife;MS. SuchvtiChaB,dra., , . _ Advocatc. • AJ^B' • • • • ~ • •• i.F.TmON(CBlMINAlAMlAaJ3Fm^^ .. , • . " ' . • • ... Pctitioacr NaVKKN KUMAR • .jAr SanjayMaun and Mr. K.K- • • ' . • ]^]lai,AdA'Ocates.' ' •/ VERSUS STATE-rH?-.CliNTM-BURliAUOl''^ JShMs-Suchitiaaadra.^ ' ; , Advocatc. , - ^ 'SSSfkMR. JUSTICE . Wlie-tkerReporters01localpapersmay bc ^ • " allowedto secthe jvidgmctit? .,• 7to br-^cfcrrcdtothoReporteror nOL r _ ' s/vVbcthcrthcjudgmciitsliouidDcrcpoucu^/,.£g, in the Digest? • _ ; . ^ •. •. : V v.e.dc.Siugh and his son Na.ecn Kumav have filed the present ..UO.S the,o.de.da.ed .3-^.cce.he..>0. passedhy • .,e CBI ch.ec.n..hat <.a.ses he .a.ed>sa...both ot 0/467/'-^"^'' of the Indian I'enal Code, i36o. •iiicm under Section i2Ox</4^9/407/-.-.—^ • . • • ^ » + % .W.p (CRIMMAUNOS. 765/2010&'871/2U10 r ' • I- (herem^iaorreferred to as IPG, for si,on) and SeetioB 13C2) read «th .. Seenon'.3(t)(e) of rhe Preventxo.of CorrupdonAet, r9S8 (hereinafter•^ •referredto as PCAet.1988.for short).Substantivechargeshave alsobeen • directedto befrarnedagainstthe petil.ouer-V.renderSinghunderSeetron •^, read ™th section.3W(e) of fee.PCA.t,tg88and againstNaveen „. i,arunder Sectionro, IPC read «id. Section«(.)-dw>th Seetron .• l,{l)(c)of'ieSCAct.1988andSection419/467/471IPG. . .. ;, The eJlegatiC.agamstthe petrdoner-V.renderSingh ,n the charge .^ sheetrs:thatdur.ngthedaee.penodi«J^y,i98.tol..'M,..aooohehad,., . .equtadandwasfoundtobednpossessionofassetedisproport,onafetoh... •taownsoureesof.neorneto the cKtentoV ,,6.,68,.98/;-rhechar^ . ,etsoutthecareerpr.fleofyirenderSingh,who was,nduetedandjomed • IndianAdnunistrativeServices-(IAS)mJuly.'I969:xhechargesheetset. ont details.offtc incomeearnedbyVuenderSingh,his wifeGeetaSmgh., MssonNa.eentomara.wellastheassetsownedbythemtoarrn.eatfe .^dconehision/finmng.It,iS,allegedin the charge sheet.that Naveen... ]&marhad ac«elyparticipatedand abettedVrrenderffinghin acquisition •'of assets:which were found disproportionateto the Imown Sources of, . income.Specificmstanceshavebeendiscussedlaterou. • • T -a. T hp>,or-p-ftilp'petitionersthat the PC Actj• 3. In brief,it is submitieaOii bendu o. pei , ^ . ^88.c^me'.intoforcevritheffectfrom9«"September.1988andconsequent^ ::"heretothe Prevention,ofCorruptionAct. r947(PCAct.r947for short)was; repealed.Accordmglyfee' chcck periOd,between July. X98a to r.* May, «iodpartlyincludesperiodpriorto enforcememofthe FC Act..988wrth effectfrom 9"> ,SeDtcmber..i988 during.fhe periodwhen the PC Act, 1947 ' «asm force:nwas submittedthati.r the period^priorto 9-September,- • i588, provisions:of.Section i3(i)(e) of the PC Ac, ,1988 read with u , w.P(CRm'llNAL)l^OS. 765/2010&87V2010 , 3 ^ ^ ^ ExplaB.at;oB^cannotbe appfed as .it wodd amouot ta violation of tiae . eonstfedonal.igh^nde.Article .oW of the Constitutionof Indra. Mxanec1s placed™on Jaga„M..SesM^«rs«sStat.^Ta^, , •i • ' • • p.,.pr Act '1088 slioiilelnot "be, Nadu. (moZlJi^CCJm^It was a-rgueQ,a.a fC Act. x, grven retrospectiveeffectas tlae Explanationto-Section13W(e)oflie PC; , . Lt..1988hasbrought^ontandcreatesanewoffencewaicUishotstoilax . 'orthesameoffenceas was definedandcoveredbySectionsCDCOofthePC, . Act, 1947- , ^ ' • ' . Article20(1)oftheConstituti'onofIndia,reads: , •. . . • . "..oflU-Ionersonshallheconvicted0f any offence • . , .Sir violationofthelawin forceat the ^ • • tliecomniissionoftheactchitrgeclasanoaence, i<m . • to apenaltygreaterthan mat^ch. : . ."mighthavebeen inflicteduiiaertte law m-oicc at , • . tlietimeoitliecormiiissioiioi.uiGOifence. • 17 •5. Interpretingthe said Ariclein'KaoShiv BahtidM, ««-s«sTfeSmm'of.VinAhyaPradesh, " .has bcen^heMdiat diis Articlern broaddrnport,prohibitsconvictionand, ' sentence under cx-pct.facto laws.. No one should be punned for • something;whicliwas la^dwhen it was done or omitted.This wouldbe highlyinequitable,unjustand contraryto the universalnotion.of•fairness.; ..ndjustice,in the afcreaaidcase,theSupremeCourtnoticedthedifference- .• hi languageof Article2p(l):of the Con^tutionofIndiaand.Sections9(3) •and 10 of.Article1of the AmericanConstitutionand it was held,thatthe Article20(1)IftheIndianConstitutionprohibitsconvictionofa.personor ; his subieetionto asentehceunder ex postfacto laws. Accordmgly.it was . observed:- , • V ^ Obtamed'at ^0 time of the . „P,(GR.M:NA1,)N0S. 765/2010«=S71/20i(l •4 • .. : . • , •'comn>issi6nof,thc^ffeme^^^-^ : rts£ts^:^ifM&s.s^ ••- . involved. • ^ ..•, -. Tg^^pv^asissupplied}' . ,a,™v.. «.««. .... «" " effectof Scction513) 01 • • • , • . • ., Oil 11^'' March, 1947 . raisedwas a<^tti5ePGAct,l947° ^therefore;SectK>.5(3)ofthePCAct,.9«ca„notl,ebasi.forconvrcnon y :^,.Hn.W=on.ae.a.cn.sse.and.c..eac,uireaprior.^ • • J.v,p-pp A'-t^lo/i? as origirialiycnacied and , ..Sectio^l 5(i)> X^) ^ : erforccdwitheffectfromll<-March.1947;readas under- , ' .' ,• . -c Amislicsen.-antis said to conimitthe : ::^ .„>ffcncc mrseond„.ti. the a-sehargeof . • , 1 his duty-. . . • if he hahitually accep'ts or obtains or .. . • +. nt+pmiVfo. to ohtam from any • agrees ^ •accept^- other person,•any . • oftheIndianPenalCode, 01- • • • if he-habituallyacccpte.orobta^^^w agreesto vduabf^tog wthouL' , . for rcbD^ilerattonwhictheknows: SaS"pr"ceeLgor ' , be transactedby mm, f „ of a-ry -oirblic •HSiiH to the persob.so conceine-J.,.o. he dishoiiestiy or, fpidulcntly . . nrisapKopnates.or'otiaerw.seco.Tverp;forhrs -own •W,P(CRiMI,^At)NOS,765/2010S.8H/201(. ' ^'5 • •• , , ; •. J persori so to ao,, oi. if he bv corruptor fflogaiinoaas or l5y ..gsSoSSyW v.; • valuabletbingorperamarj'-S,- , ,. • . . , •s/vimbotii. . ; • , • • •. • In ary trial of an,offencepanislrable • ••; . und.r1ub-3;ction;(2) ; , : persDE or any P- ,amiot , • . , • • • property•QispiQpoiL.oi.a^e,^, incime«raybe:proved ana . .-• .drall presmiie/umess .. .,•,, , •• the accusedperson;ISgnuiy , . •' ' teXe shS not DC invalidby reason •- •• ..- -• . • .'• The suoremecourtrn»«'s case (supra)ha. held PC Act^«47iid-t have retrospectiveopera.on,butwas upabl.to; •agree-that:taking .nto considerationpe^,arary.resourcesor-propertyr„ , :^.ess.nofthe accusedor anyotberpersononMs behalfbefore-.ePC •...•,..wasenacreawas.nanyway,grvrng.tKePC^AC.,.^a .,etrospeet,vcoperation.Itwas observedthatastatute-cannotbe sardto-e •' - \, :,-3artof ^icreamsitesofits actionIS drawnf^^^ retrospectivebec^l-uoe.a pal - •' , ^!;.sino-nhas beenheldinsajjanSingh(supra)as ' time antececeni lO alo pc.oSuT.f,-- under-; - 5oolong3tfee words oftficsectionand givingtem^eirplain ^ 'il impossibleto say tlrai the Kl'lXnTStptiSr^a^^^^^!J'o°,e°Sn ,,:::^Sr:n;ShS^s:Jo;hii:bbhalf.to accept ••^ •" V- •• : •_: fi-nt'cucia pecuniary-resources•o; , , .. • . ,' 'the eomentioii L; ^ ; ; • •• properly ^ .••••• • •: ^ ^•••dateGtcQmmencem^u^_^^^^ ,^ , . ^ .- : „ .,,of acco:a3atin apply tlic receip^^ • . : •.. - • -• proper. ^ ^ ; ..• •. . • . • acciascdliimsell.....; • ^ ^ . ' „•••'•'" ' • • ••" •; • ,6.; Mention ' , ' ,•' ^. •• meaningless,.•-iiooo i Qp^rty is itself,a .' • • • ; ••' CVC17 P=c}™f'i7 — : , .^itoceoar mronie^ cesooices.or .. in terns to say LijaL.tbt , ,. .. .' • • property can-be is wliol^^^ ; , , sources of inco.™^^ . . • .' •. misconccived. ^/i-nic . g^yeg sources 01. • • •. : - - . • . • • • .income aicn c...c. _ ^ articularpome of, • • .- ,unde.Rtandmsaposrt,o^^^^^^ . .... ; , :• . timethe , tetog .made to , . • , • , • • • .• -regardeaaS-assc-s d ^ .... . • . •:, •• ^secwhether.theknow^ : ' ': WSS=Ssiss£^ ... .' .tie contentionwhetiierSectMn.5(0) - . : . .dt..con.nt.n.as..e.ea.^^^^^^^ , : • •phees i.n the hands -oftheprosecutionanew .mode oi. ptov,n„ . . • .places--- . , . 1- -1 •• r tinO-reusedv/erealready • •• •• •• • •'• • , V- . q,^-pT A-t 1QA7withwhichthe-'-Luseo - -. . . underSection5Ci)0T^b,ePCA.l,.j,/. . . ; .. . .charged,itwas accordmglyobserved. ., , •. . , . . V '•,•• ••. ••• - •• "13« ••••^^• ••: • . ' .. •..• •: :...:. SglSSSrpS - d.e. .^ ^ . W:P(CR!ivnNAL)NOS.765/2010&871/2010 \ - . "acqmsition of\,pecumary•res.oiirccs .. • • . ^ i-boudait was notinviolatioiiof alaw m _ • " ^ ' •• tin-'.eVithe commissionofsucli act oi:-acqiiibiLio,a. , ' . . :thi3 argaracQtwere correcta'convictiono.- ^ . •- .ITdel- the "presnmption.'raiseQmiQCi bCs). _ ^ respectof neciiniaryresoiirces.or propert^^ac^ured- • -• • •• £Se"thePrevention.f'M . ,, • •'^breach offundamentalrigh-teunaerAa 2(^^^ • „ . . ;Constitutionand so itwoaidbe piopei for u., ,^ - • - • to constme-S. sCs) a way so ncA .o : • , . . •'• possession of pecumary resources , . ••; ,•. 'iccfuired,beforethe.Actfor tnepurposeaCtn^L^ ^ . • , • •• The basis oLtiie„s:SiimenL.ll^^ . • • • • S^eatesVi^iiidofo^^ . • •• •' •. •• ^-ry-is .homierjmscy^ y^,- ••' • -SStacc'foZSe^ •• . ' 'criphnaLmisccmducLajiJi^ ^ , . . •^raccuscdpersmifL.aii^^ y. (emphasissupplica; . •, ; , - •• g; •: Loaraodgou=jsc]for:mcpentionertas'submittedthatSectos(3) of ., the PCAtt. 1947as origkiallyenactedwas ddotedvide/theAntiComption • Laws (Ameiidmo:at)Act..i964and substitotedby anc«. sA'section.;The, -• origitfaiciatiscgO) of iKe PC Aet; 1947«as modified and re-enactedas Section5(:i)(e)of tie PCAct;1947aridiafmscoiincctior,my.atlentionwas •• drawnto ae;effecf=fenactment.of.SectK,nsdKo)oftheJC A=t.4947as a result of tile Anti CorruptionLaws (Ajnenament)Aci, ^9^4 W • •Mc.Jwa.nJ^t.ersMsKaliflr.JCoiLSabramamaMy? £i92Z1:asec524. In thesaid case,the residentialpteraisesofthe accused ' ••wercscardred on 17'^May,1964andalotofassetsweredetceted,Whrlcthe. matter v..s, still pdndmg, mvestigatpn-hePC Ac, 1,47underwent . :..nendn^enron 18- Dece.^3e,1964 enactmentof Anti Corruption ^taws (Amendment}Act,i964^vhichresultedin insertionof clanac (e) to .Section5(1).whicnbecameanew offencepnmshaWounderScctron5(2) of tee PC Act. l947.AheSupremeCourthas in paragraph3'of,thejudgment • W..P(CRlfvilNAi.rNOS,765/2010&.S71/2010 8 • - • . . • . observedthattheHigi. on.anappe.1fledbytheaecu.edhadcometo'^;T? the^coBolt®onthat^o{fcnoesuDdorScctioa5(i)W\(War.a^ ^,,.9^.7<ve.e.otvo.deo.t.Hewa.ac«i«ed«„de.the.^ questionarose.^eti.eraccusedcouldbe co^vfedunder ^ ,he.PC Act. .947, w^ueh.eau.e .nto force o. .8-Dcce..ber..964. The, , ; ^ ..SaprerBC,courtheldthatfee accusedcouldnot Ue eonvrctedunderSoctron^ . 5(l)(e)of PC Act, 1947in the absence 01 atsy e«aenc>.0.1-^i-oia . ,. that^the,appecam had acquired or was found to be m, possession of ' • pecumarysources of proper^^drsprepornonatcto h,s;l.no«n,sourccsof ^ ^ ,„comc after cormng into force of 4e Anti Corruption (Amendmenl).. •.. . .. ,,tt96.«Ureffecrfromr8.^Dcecnrber,r964iB™wo£Article.oWof«ae , : ConstrtutiontAs.notrcedab<,ve.feesearchwasconductcd.ntheprenr.ses:of., AC accusedon r/^May. X964i.c.beforethe Ant.corruption(Anrcndnrcnfl, • ^ •;Act.l964,^-®: enforced.The.SupremeCourt in the case of-Kah'irJKo.I _. , •sanmriB«damSa;muma^ y . , : • ' «^o 'So when there^vrasno law in force ac . •. . •• the tuiUenthe accusedwas ; . soprcleCourt.dfst.gurshedthc a^isron i,n the case of• . cupra, as ongmaily Section• 56) of the PC-Act, W ^vas naerey • . ..escribing-arole of .acneefor the purposeof provingthe offence^^ t • ;,i.inalinisconductasdefincdunderScction5(x)ofthePCAct.i947. ne , ^ \V.P (ClllMVN^Al.;);NOS•.765/2010&8Jl/20i0- ^ ^ ' ^. ong-nd section5(3) ofthe PC Act, .947 constitutean offencem ' • ' itself. ,-' . •.-•••• . • • • ;; '•« n.ay be relevant tonotice here the ,Ies.slati.el.i.to.y a.d • , •_ , ': enactmenterftheAntiCorv^tionXaw.(An.enan,enO,Aet..t967.«chwas , .,^ Heemedlc^eomemo-forcew,theffectfro™5'''Mayr^^ . .saidi967Actreadsas iinder;- _ .• •• •. : relatio« to- certain jpendmg ^ . Notwitb.standing- • • ; • • ra) ' SijbstitutioBof inevv provisions . • • " ^ pfQp.. c-the Prcvcmionof CorruuLion I SCCnpn v-iJ 01 wC^.,Lau . „ i.'Uo to/iVAft-)bv • • • •• •, •Art 1947(bercmgifterrsfeiTCQ-iOc^l^t.1947-.-;-^ . • <v. ^2XcV of tlie Ariti-Corriiption4._L<.ws^ • ; ••• ••^endmk) Act, i96^^ ; ;• .• • . • the 1964-Aot),aiid_^ . • • . •- „ •/ . • •. •• ohai] ^-e deemed alv^ays'to uaye applied to aaa ). .... • • •••^cWion to trials of offencespuiiisiiablc.iJ^^^^^ . ^ ., • •• •• • • on (2) of Sec. 5 of :the 1947 v Coi'rtiimnediatelybefore.sucbcommcnccrneBl • .. . • •as4nosuchncwpro^nsiorishadDecn.siibsLita.ecfoi. . • . the sa.id sub-section (oJ- ... •. • • •. . •. The accraed per-son in any trial,to and in , • . relationt-i wmelasub-section(i) appliesmaj 4ie • ^ • ^>i;a.i-oKr die commcnccment o^ uic . . .: •. • ; td :nS^sieidemandbemg ^ade.the, , , • . , • St ;a'Soeeedmd>thetrial : • • • (a) Vor the removalofdoubtit is herebyprovided , • ' , • . an appeal or application;for. • , cpmmencemejitof dasA^t, oi .. ..' .. /•WP(CR1M1-NAL).NOS.765/2010&871/2010, . .!« any such; trial,;i. 6^ ^ ^,W> '''.•' coriirocticemeiit - ' . ,• • . . : . • •. • . Shailremandthe casefor trial in conformvtywith : .. . • .the provisionsoftillssectiou. . .• ' •' ••• rcjcctcd.Appealbeforethe SupremeCourt-ws-dismissedmdie deas^ • ,, ;• ,9CC sQ-i.Observingas under;- , . ., ..• • '^^rnde 20(1) deals with ex post factc)^^^ • • •. - ^sp.s^i^^ • • thccouvicuohofapersouo.^ ' : • ; • • • .Coun -joiiitedout Liiat • • , • • . . • "oT-ipedat the time of the commissioiio- ; . , . • . • Cofenccorbyacourteaf^^^^^^^ . . • ' •':• • • ISr^s^^'ssg : , . . • • diserimiD,atjoiior,ihe«oU.>on » • . /;-••: ..fciidamentalrightmayberavolved. ,. , .. W.P (CRlMi'KAlO.NOS,.76:./20l0&87.1/2010 ! I 'xnus-the•appellant diifcrer... ^ of-fencc that wa?, comraission-.01a.c was nTforce and ilS2iSS:€s;£ffs time. • J • • ^'WKe-e .an •Act is repealed ' .• • cl eBaitDionl . . .. manif.® no' .ntentioBiW ^ • ,• n-c'HisinalAct ^AaVlcontmue-repealed , , . , • • was that , .. •; • secondAct revivedtheiixstaDiniiio. _" ^ ;. ^\ -riicrccanbe-noobject^B^^wi^^^ •• ,• , procedurewinch was " of ' the • ' offence was section ^ as it .'.amendmentIS tb.atsub-sec^-^^^ • - . . • stood beiore to have always ••• . .-siiaii appiy "'""T ; . ^x.,,,c.F^,-,.csIt may be ifby • ' , • • applied-inrelation 10 ' • , • . • •• this deeming ^lOvioiOi. • \ ^ome • . '• .into op='f.*°°-"f.:3 ,0 rtore than rcitciatingthe . . - out, wnai is -' .-^^-QmerslClausesAct. Mr EffectotSeenon6^^^^ ^ ^•. SS;aiu^ ^ bfcSteS • • • .• •• created. It is ^unnecessary ."in' certain ,• fS-SeSe ' :•' , ^: . • „voccduve;isreived ' . „, -.SltSSlSSe^-^uitin^eerea.^^^^ ..• •-new oftcnee; ; , , • . , • Sec.onr5(t)(e)of the.PC'Act,t.8.an. 5«(e)ofthePC Act, t,47 .eiacnecaland pan mater,a(exceptto. two chan.csor aad.t,o.snot.ce be,c^.-i.:^ere.orc,not possibleto acceptthe cootcn.on.hat~ ..ifferenccif :the eheC period overlapsthe PC A.t„t,47 and ^^ ^ :,S8:Xt« notpossihleto acceptthecontention,thatthe checKper,od ^ ~ > u'y \ . -/• • •^65/2010 &8.71/^OiO ^ _•• • .', • n ^ in.auctionis priorto S=pt»^e,:,.988 and.therefore,th. PCMt..•H^ • .;<;«« . .ei.,,.ve..=tro.pec.veefiec. v,ew, of the•a.fKor.a.ve. ^ .. •'• SirtaJi's caso (supra).A.V proiionm-erP,cnlofth=SirprcmcLmiu.m.><3®a«^.a ... . ••.o.eeaa.ove.-^.. supreme «... t.e ca.e « •. • ^^ .atogether. _ aafe.e.taspe.i.e.en.et.e.ofa.ewofece«tb.int.o» ' -. .; . .• • 5WCe)ofPCAct;.947/rhetwo:ehang../additionsinSect.onx3WWoffl'e,. ' .• i>CAct.l98&aremeKxplanatioi^andremovalofthedausegrv.ngdisaeUon. , \o the Courtsto awardpunistarxntofteislianoneyearfor reasoirsto^te . • * recorded in writmg. • • . . ;., • . . learned counsel fot 'iie'petitioner,,however,.,relies..pan the , ,;.oianatiooto sectionx3W(e) of the PC Aet, 1988 and s^rmtsthat Are •.: . explanationcreatesane. offenceand, therefore,the ratioIn.thecase . SOrtion,l3(i)(e)of the PC Act.-xgSB Includingexplanationthereto ; 15- tcad as under ^ -CrimiMl niisco«ifert by '.a. p»*- ^^?5TSicservantisWdto committhe offenceof criminalmiscondnct,- is in possession (e) ifhe a.^anypej:-n income- i;xFianation.ForAe^ "knovvn sou.ces oi .ncoi. recciptnas .been from any lavrful soiuc- -a ^ Qvigions of any' public servant. • , . ,. 765/2010&8/1,2'w10 I-' • •'• ,6 Th= uKpla:.ationto SecnonasaXe)defines • .' ' „ of .nco..e-and statesth.t a>i. expresstom^^^^ . fro,..a.v lawfulsoutceand alsorequnesthatthe receiptshouldha«been , : • ,ntin.atedby the pubileservant.naecortocemthany.pto^ionsof ; • • .nJesotorders.AS.otieedabove,this e,ptoatfon«asnothereinthe PC : •Aet;t947.Notietns.thisiactmJasa«.*Scshadri(snpr^ • ' Courthas observedasunder;- . . • • • •• '• 'V, ^ barr^ reading of SccdoD 30(2) of'^^^^988 , . .^;s«;^Satany£:tdoneoranyaefioBtaKen^ •• ry,ru-rtcdto have been done or taken uudei oi^ m . • piSnaBceof-iherepeaiedAi^t^^^^^^^ :. •Lot lucousisterit^ath the provisiousof ^-C'T-'-^d to have been done, or i.akcn-mu . ^ . Pircuc^nr-oof the correspondingproAasions oi 'Ja. . ^ does not substituteSection 13 m oi - • • r'n;; cof die 19^7Act/Section30(2)is apphcable . ^, •• • ' •• • XAntli>-:toreiudiGCto the applicationof SecQOii6m .^,c^^^^r-^iaauscsAet,i897^I^ouropinim., . • • ,, , • • • ., . iphcationof Section13'oftl.e1^8^^ LO^^ _ • . • • •Jh^^rio-^of -the nresentcase wou^d offendbeaioub ' • • o^th-GeneralClausesAct, vvhich,interahaprov^. . • . 'tbat'^-npalshahnot (i)affe.ct-theprevio^^^ , • • . ofW e—ot s, ora« .. c-::fFered- •thereunder, or (n) ax.!cc. a.y^ •••.•- '• •.. • proceedingsor remecio^in res^^ . .. • •• " r3|bts, privdege, oM ... • . o^nishm.ent.Seetion 13. ho1i .tvthe . SSr" ,7. Bcrored.velhnsfortheron thesaidaspect,rt may be relevant-tonote^ •^ the-faetsinthe ease ofJaga.M.Sesfcadri(supra),,vhichhadresulted>n ^ t^e aforesa.dobseryadons.In the sa.dcase,the cheAper.odwas fromn- ./May,..;.03..Apr,r,8.,fe.,priorto enforcementofthe PC Act,r^8 - effectfrom ,.^-Scptonrher,t988.-thechargeswere alsoframedund^r ^ •Section•5Ci)(d)and (e) readwhh Section512) of die1CAc., -94/- 'W-.P(ClllivirNAUNOS.765/2010dc 871/2010 '' . ^ ^ court acq.itt=a:the ^==«ed^de j.dgmctd^d^9^ -b'--990 but the. ,M d.d.ion -.vas reversed and ftc„ffish Court convicted the accused fox . •, offencesta.dc.sect...saXe)of PC Act. .988holding,tater-aha. . . •,,c PC Act. W standsrepealed enact..cntof re AC, .988.Relyrug ^ uponScctioa30®of^cPCA^,.988.,.heffigh;Courtop.u.dtiaa.ti.e. ,,„ accused..ouldbcdc^edto.avc.ee.ciar,cdfo.offe.ce3undetSect.ou,, ^ .,30)(c);;ead^withSccHon.3(.)rftiaePCA....988.Onf«rth^^ •, {edccusedtodacSup.en.eCourt;thesa^ewa.aiowedobse™gthatt^^^^ . •,Ue.:^doffcacesW=re=o—d.vheurcAc,.947 was,Bopera.ou.K . , held that Secda. 30(.) of thc.PC Ac^ x988 was .ot appHcaWe.On ,• , it was also observedftat the HighXo^had fafledto deal • variousreasonsg.-n.bythetrialcourtin supportoOieorderon ac<,urttal. The cvrdence or, rccord has^beeu discuBsbd by Are Supreme Court rn para^raph-oonwards^aeSuprcnreCouxthasohserved-thatthemghCourt. . - was.rrot^^tin re3ecrrngthe«s. of are trial court relying^ ... : cxplanatianto .Sectiorr.xsWCe)ofthe PC Act. .988 as Ihe.accusedhad not, ,•.• •,,^ •intimated;&c-amount,allegedlyreceivedfrom h« mother-in-lawto the , .. GovGrrsmcnl. ... • • . ' . • • ^ • • ,8. The decrsrouof dre SuprcrnecourtirrJc^g^M-Seshadri(supra) was aonsideredby.theSupremeCourt.inStele SMnie, Infte sardcase,the checkperiodwas'fro»29'^May.1944.vAeqthe accusedw,stnductedrnto .er^cedll tue date of ftc rard.in.hrshouse on aS-- Decenrher.t97t. As • . ^ .Vv,r =c"Hon <l)(e) was' enacted and incorporatedi.n PC.Act. llOLlGCa aDOs^C,- •> ... ,,,,,.th cffectfrom Deceuaber,.964.The HighCourthad ohse^d .^atac,u.srtiorrofweal^sardto be disproportionateto hrS hnownsourccs e.;„c6^neoriorto 1964couldnotbetakenintoaccount.srnceprrprto .964 W.P (CRliyilNAU'NOS.765/2010&S7-i.201u , .. • ... • •• •' • • or offence The Supreme Court • Section5(i}(c)of the PC Act, 1947 ^ ^ ' ,, ; ' .h -•-•^ referrVngto'the decisionin SogjanSmgh:scase- ..,^ •. , allowea tfee appeal .•• (s^r.)-and remandedthe n^atterlaclcto the B:gh Conrt.fte Supreme, ,; - courtwhaeremaud;ngthe.^.terb.ckexpressly.ofervedto ^ and 1=; =f the decision of the Supreme Court mSajjanSingh's case • ., ^•(supra),v^'hichhavebeenquotedabove. - • • ' • ,5.' The repression«taio.^sourcesofincome"was usedin;Sertion,5(3) . , ofthe PC Aet, l947:andalsomSectionsCDW aftcilitwas incorporatedin .1,64 in. PC Art, io47'fThe said expressioiis-incorporatedin Section , h(,)(e).ofth,c EC Act. 1988. albeitwith an explanation,definingthe said hipression.Thequestionrpsedis,whetherintrodu.:ion.fthe explanA^^^- . 'defining'theexpression"knownsourcesof incomc"has resultedin a.new- ^ •' oi=fencc or the cxpianacionis merely ciarifieatoryor proceduralin nature. ; and does notcreateasubstantivenew oftencc-soas to pffcndArticleaoW ^ •' OX the ConstitutionofIndia. . . • ... . -.0, Tiie explanationto Section.l3W(e)ofte PCA.t.1988hasthe effect ' • • of defining thd expression"Imo™:sourccs of income' used .in Section • l3(i)(e)of the ?C Act. 1988.The explanationto Scctionl3(l)(e)of theIC. . Act. 1988-consistsoftwo'paxts.Thefirstpartstatesthatknown,sources-'of • incomemeansinconieMeceivedfrom anyla.rfulsourceandthesecondpart; • - sta^sthatsuch receiptshouldhavebeeninttmatedbythepublicservantm, '• • • accordancev^rh the provisionsoflav., rules and ordersfor-thetimebeing. • , . ••apphcabie. .' . ^ . ' ' • . • 21. Refertmg to the .first part of the expression •%nown sources of; income"inI'f.K.amMkrishnaiahvsStateofA-f-ii-W-Crl l-J-17 2' SupremeCourtobservedas under:- • /=' RlMl'NAbli^OS.765/2010&871/2010 W.P (C Tne emphasisofAs phrase'ImownsOT^ , : • : ^niiotattonof the term;'mcome^.t^ ; , . . v™luiderstood.as meaiv-rig receipt hamo : : • to ose's laboiir,or expertise or prope-^^^ . - fe;estment,aridbeingtetherar.ourc^ • • • v-oid- a regular leyeiiue. Jlheofc CooaAiai • •SacSriSs are mu.ders* ^ Therefore,-it caa be said L^ai, . . receiptmthehand 0^^ ,, • . • -torwo-ald not partake'into the character ot , . . • ;,i"onr" For the Diiblicsen-ant,whatevervetnrahe .Ss'rfM^ervrce,«U be fee primary. •fr-om- Other income which can conceivaoi^.b.. . . ;;C v:n„athe pnblicsen-actv,iribe m , ,, • • :?;cfetiToai:(a)his.property,or(b) ta^ • • • V Worn .windfall,or gams'ofgrau .cxime^oi h-rmoral secrkionsby persons prmrar^^^^^ •• • •••• •••^cthercceiptforthe'']mbwi:30iircc:ofmcou.^ oi - • ^ ; publicservant." • • , • •• : •(See also,State.^fM.P.«««sAmidhmd^oreCh^taizaSAll •• ••• , . • • ' . ' \ . 22. : this briBg us to the' secondpart of the cicplanation.definmg the, expression'"knownsonreesofincome"i|l.intimationhy thepablicservant Mn accordance«th any provisionsof law. rples or orders apphcabl.toa, .pnblicservant:Section5(3)- di= PC Act,;r947beforeitwas:aniendedand ,, Section5(i.)Ce3oftiiePC Acr. 1947and Sectionl3Cl)(e),oi tne PCAct, ,19,08 h^vebeen quoted above.TheIdngnageof the substantive.provisions,in the. .-dirceSectionscondnnes'tobe &e samemou^-Sectron5(3)Moreit was • , aniendcdwas heldto be aproceduresectionin the case 'cstipra):,'TheScrtion.5(3);of the'PCAr;t.i947beforeits amendmentwc.f. ' W.P"(CRIM AU NOS. 765/2010_&871.(2010 \ Swarm-Vs. sum ME. • , •• • • : Decsrobcr,1964 was mterpieui.^1.- ^ iQ^SC?find itwas observed; •,••,• . •; , : . ^Itistxue^Se^nsM^ ' •; ,' create a new Oiiencc oU ^ •- • • d\ddence, —a • • ' •, , •;• •• completedeparrare^ always.lies ;• . criniinaiju'iispiudenc^ •..^n-'hemoredientsofthe. • . •• onthep^sccmPJ^^-^ . OTieiiCCCi.uU\^eJ,. j'•,/^v.--.iro'e'^Piriiedagainst- • . • . >• • . hto/VahreiErsDCotoi.v^^^ • • • Act. flab ..... . • iastance. iJiai iflc CQa , ... . • -. ••• V . the dischargeofills .. . .... • ..die fact as . Impenfj Baii.<^1.1 Ii." ^ and China. *•• ••Chartcrea Boof ^ v',.wi^-isiict credit--Adth ... •; •• • (ChafldiiiChoi,4fa,icu) _ • • •• tho.se Banks totaUea.up-o^^^^^^^^^ .. . . • • . ^ .91.000. He accountea ^Qi u". ^ • \ . -statingthat he was aii-Oui./ -^ .-had hecn able /"X"ears-, that after. . .' • • .. . .. .. .iEngtodfm-agriodpj^^- • ;. • . Ills retm-n lO incLio.,. •• • • posts for aboryt 20 • . ,• • . •• • • ; „ Wustnes, Ai...y ^ .- • • . •India; that he that with h.is liimted;, • .-. . dependants except to "save a go^od; •• . - .-liouseno-idexpenses,^^ • .••.••• • ,• round sum out oi ms saa 3 . ^ to'oV. hrni-^ •' • .- . --were considerable, ^'^.^^.^""^-j.-eadthof the co.mitry,- . . •'. ' •• • •- •'tonghoutthe ijngtn^a^^-^ . • ••. •. •• .. thus-siiabling_.niin'o b,e saved "by • ^ •' •. ' '• wav "ot travelnng a^^jg^tions dmnixg his -. •. • .• .. stayiilgi^th.h^inei^'^^- •••:; • .• " SMierS:e;^^^^^^ . • ,' . • of November 1947- ... , • ' . , . . : : .. • • ^ : •/.. '..•. . . • • . had .held tnar if plausib- -.4^^ .3^^ . . .. . -: . ; oftercaby an accrued . .. : . •••••--. • • of propeity wlucu^-wa * accusedfrom. • . „ ' •• charge,the ^ '••possessing incrimmating- •" , crim.in^'-^i.iCsp.o.nsiu- ^t^^ .j.-iJ^Qgp, cases_ bavejno, - *1 W.P (CRIvnWAL)NOS. 765/2010&871/2{)10^ • to ^=^;,tisfacton33^.j£cou]^^ •' • • H ••: . ^ • •. . • •. • • . - • •• , ,aieng£s<dsiwttii2^=^:^^ . H.r.,-niit'imist .2;.Q_to__the oifeBc^._tiie_j2^iiC^^ ,dAds<^Jiseit]ie •, • cast a Vord^Qfi •.8J^QjA&!=^^ ^ hppri71o^on the sanlcasp 6» ;]^e p'ro'Snition"has not led ' of tne case, _is .-^a ^ the,Imomi^miE^' mfiiimc- tff liiww ii« t <m. attern;iOIL_Jwas.^^ ,not...saia^ism&-j^^ -„,. that thesalas "VnowTi sources...oi, ' -^mia in«>me' ntmrn bt. cxpjici:ea ,^.vhc instanf-case, only iead c-^naeuce,..o ^ to- .eaiD, tis . •• xo 'show tnat the a^ r during'idie :Itengby,se^ unto ^of be • material, pei-ioa. i/i.e pnine allowancew,as justifiedin.coneluamgL allov/ahce is , iiso .a ^Uice of "it officerconcerned • ordinarilymeantto°°*'^l-'X"t!';n„eidcntalto journeys ••• for his oii^of-pockeW^-JJ^-.^ coi^d perforraedby nuij. 10.- L. o^^-.-. - substantal. , kt possaly be ^.C|^ .0 a y^ ^ source of mcoms. luc . Gi W.P (CRIMl'NA1,)'N0S.765/2010&871/2010 ISSBaS^ii^Sr •^^ aSisS;#ia • • -aaitsaES^ ssasffiasBj* • • • • . .. ., • .SSSSS^g : • 'iiiissill: , •s£i£iiiss S"S5a;;r.e:;;xcesdispropo.t.=B.te • •' Ev.nafterSeaionsO)™s deletedandSection5W(e)™s enacted. ' •fe Sup.=..= court in -e case 'of Smm of MaU^rasMra- y/asudeO'jlawi^ChamiraKaide!ii>ar;li^Sd-S-SCC.Jii.-^as °bse ^ aatthe =Kpiess>OB•l.nown sources,of occurnng,n Sect,onsWC^) • hasadefinitelegalcomiotatiGnwhichinthecontextmuSL.neandiesouiccs 'hiownto the prosecutionand'notsonicef,reliedupon aad.known to tl , ...sed.section s(.)(e),^«as observedhy the SupremeCourt, cast,a wen.n the accucedfor vt uses.iewords ••for whichthe puhlicservant, eaiinotsatisfactorilyaccount^..The onus is on the accisedto account or W.lMCRlM-n-^AUl^OS.'65/2010&871/2010 -0. • a.d. s.drfac.o,:ny..piam the assei.-Accovdingly, in WaWeo'^ ; OiaiidraXai£laliaai-(supra)itwasobservcd:^ • • •• «,]! ,ili6 provisions of Section 5(3) r-ave • . , i-cor n'bi'»ct of jididal/interoretatioE..I'lrst utie . . •. .' -• • • •thp v^en-settled prmciples: see/o.o.lJ. ^uc-mj • •, •• iate- Sajjan Singh v. State of Punjab and . ; •• • V'qtnto-nf UP -^^>0Icgisiaturetliongfllitfib • ••4^',eMe^eVc5c!e.cc»«a^^ ., • rM) Li mate «»e jfossetsjon<rf . •'. ' oP.iceif cTimirialniiscondactby • . due to- • services., . , •• . , • • ' The, terms ^^^.lessiQBS-^P-eyiag• • • • : : • . . „ . . N° " • 5;wi^fo?^vraptioD.of guilt m , • . .or.ir^.o^ roneedto mentionijecaon-sW-ve) •• • •. , ^ .\. , SoSn''T£efi;stpartofti.eseettonc^ • •; oa^ac prosecutionand,tne second.oiT^^^^^^^^ . ^ '^1 -11 ill' •• •• tnJ-oHcidth?.tthe biuidmiS-OILSlid^ : •, . •• • • •fo-Vrv^ngdispropca-tioiiateassetsmhis possessioi •• • ' • fo^MYhichhecaimotsatisfectonty.acOT^^^^ . . • ' • foV^'Hcdof an offenceunderSection5(2) read . Sectioii.5(iXs)of the Act unless .' •disproves.all possiblesourcesoimcoax. . • •• W>tCR.MmAIJ^:OS,765;20l0^iS7l/20,0, y • ,• . -• • ,, icg2u.om:a'^i.ii-- •;, ^ -'c the hurclen of . •• and (2) tie erideiM" isadmg essentialto cstaWishtlic ciiarge ,• pvoTOig everylhu^cb.,c ^ . against the •«•, . 'diat •bLLrdeii_ i^ev-i ^ ,-^-F• r,rooflies excKuswely • • . •• iBip'-wlrale'till"I"** '"i", n'y rrfrrminffffences-- . npoo.thS-PtnSW)'''?"',. fart in issuenas is howcvetJflUa •m-thfijasa^^ . . • . ciisctejadbMap^^^^^^ ; • •• / •• ttgtefent.rf Jte 5„te)axe tte uiicler ijcCLiou bC^J --^mn-ces or iDropert^'' . ••• satisfactorJy accouiiL. before it cai]j2rm&-a musLpxQ;<£.thAiQ!lam!J^^^^ ,t ; hk posScssiQsjisiJl• • •• -^f I'urimi1fti c||iiri7*m'iiTii^irr^'^ « ... jmilTBW?' ZjiiJ^o of the_.aKiised,wera ' • I lu iiil iiTi^'ni nfrnirm . casEIoportio^^ . .cstablisiied^jne. • •'. .g ^ tn accouptiQi.,. . -suchj^urSSS^i^^ 3ccQ3iBU2t-M . • . . • Th^ extent,•. • ^_nasne-fi^J=^^ in cossc^m-.-Ol l.mlfc--5crY.ant.,.ji3___W^ • . .^ ..diffixOEmimat^asjs^ • bv