STATE OF BIHAR Vs. LALU PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EARLIER when the present government Appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 18-12-2006 had been taken up by this Court after the issuance of notices upon respondent Nos. 1 and 2, a preliminary objection had been raised on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as respondent No. 3, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) regarding the maintainability of the appeal on behalf of the State of Bihar. After hearing the parties, by order dated 20-9-2007, it was held that the present appeal by the State of Bihar is maintainable. The matter has now been heard on the issue of grant of leave to appeal and admission on the merits of the case.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1, who was accused no. 1 in the Court below, was charged for the offences under Section 13 (1) (e) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 of having amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income during the period between 10-3-1990 to 31-3-1997 in his own name and in the name of his wife, Smt. Rabri Devi, respondent no. 2, their seven daughters and two sons to the extent of Rs. 46,26,826. 87 which he could not satisfactorily account for. Respondent No. 2, who was accused No. 2 in the trial Court, was charged for the offences under Section 109, I. P. C. read with Section 13 (l) (e) read with Section 13 (2) of the prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for abetting respondent No. 2 in the commission of the said offence by not only keeping large number of assets valued at Rs. 19,97,191. 38 out of the said disproportionate assets of her husband either in her own name and/or in the name of her children but also by falsely claiming her separate income by way of dairy business, agricultural Income and income from rent in the income tax returns filed for the years 1986-87 to 1996-97 in 1996 with obvious motive to screen and save the respondent no, 1 from legal action for the possession of the said disproportionate assets by him,

(3.) THE admitted position is that the respondent No. 1 was the Chief Minister of the State of Bihar from 10-3-1990 to 28-3-1995 and again after a short break of a week from 4-4-1995 to 25-7-1997. It was alleged that during the check period of 10-3-1990 to 31-3-1997 he had a total income from sources known to the prosecution of Rs. 16,55,386. 03 whereas his expenditure during the same period was Rs. 20,17,557. 52 and further he had immovable and movable assets amounting to Rs. 42,64,656. 38. On the basis of the said figures it was alleged that during the check period the accused-respondent No. 1 was found in possession of disproportionate assets to the extent of rs. 46,26,806. 87 being the balance after deducting the income during the period from the expenditure incurred and the assets acquired during the check period.