P. VIJAY AMALDASS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, P. Vijay Amaldass, a public servant employed as District Manager in Food Corporation of India during the check period between 01.01.1993 to 01.03.2002, was found in possession of assets disproportionate to his known source of income, hence, tried before the learned Principle Judge for CBI cases, Chennai in C.C.No. 24 of 2004. The trial Court held the charges proved and sentenced him to undergo 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment and imposed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,00,000.00 for the offence under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Challenging the sentence and conviction, the present appeal is filed.

(2.) Background of the case: On 10.06.2002, the CBI registered First Information Report against P. Vijay Amaldass and his wife Smt. Regina Mary, based on credible information that P. Vijay Amaldass, who joined as Assistant Grade III in Food Corporation of India on 04.07.1973 at Hyderabad, later promoted as Assistant Manager and Deputy Manager, while serving at Hyderabad, Calcutta and Cuddalore, he had acquired assets of movables, immovable and valuable securities in his name and in the name of his wife and other family members by corrupt or illegal means, disproportionate to his known source of income, which disclose commission of offence under Sec. 109 Penal Code r/w 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) After detail investigation, a final report was laid down against P. Vijay Amaldass, after obtaining sanction to prosecute. The trial Court took cognizance of the report, framed charge against the accused/appellant under Sec. 13(2) r/w section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for he being a public servant as Assistant Manager/ Deputy Manager in Food Corporation of India at Cuddalore, Bankura and Malta during the period 01.01.1993 and 01.03.2002 acquired assets disproportionate to his income. As on 01.03.2002, he had been in possession of pecuniary resources and properties worth about Rs. 18,64,048.13 paise in his name and his family members name. Before the trial Court, the CBI, to prove the charges had examined 40 witnesses and marked 238 exhibits. On behalf of the accused one witness and 3 exhibits were marked.