BHIMRAJ SAGAR Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: PANAJI)
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Click here to view full judgement.
PRITHVIRAJ K.CHAVAN, J. -
(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order of conviction passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., Court, Mapusa, Goa on 16.12.2013, convicting the appellant of an offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 13(2) of the said Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, can be stated as follows:-
The appellant was working as 'Operation Officer' in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and was posted at the Vasco-da-Gama Terminal of the Corporation. It is alleged that the appellant abused his official position, while working in the said capacity from 17.1.1989 till June 1995. He had amassed huge wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. According to the prosecution, total income of the appellant during check period was to the tune of Rs.6,37,294/- and the expenses were to the tune of Rs.2,62,461/-. The appellant was in possession of assets worth Rs.8,39,606/-. The appellant did not owe any assets prior to 17.1.1989 and, therefore, he was found in possession of the disproportionate assets worth Rs.4,58,773/-. He was given a benefit of 10% of the total income. The value of his disproportionate assets, therefore, calculated at Rs.4,20,613/-. Since the appellant could not tender an explanation for having possessed the aforesaid disproportionate assets, he has been charge-sheeted as above, by the C.B.I.
(3.) Initially, the appellant was tried and was given a benefit of doubt by the then Special Judge, South Goa, by the judgment and order dated 1.12.2004. In an appeal preferred by the State, bearing Criminal Appeal No. 12/2006, this Court remanded the matter to the Special Judge at Margao, mainly on the ground that the learned Special Judge did not properly marshal the evidence and did not give findings, by considering all the oral and documentary evidence, led by both sides.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.