Delhi District Court
Maharashtra vs . Pallonji Darabshaw Daruwalla Air 1988 ... on 29 November, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SHRI L.K. GAUR, SPECIAL JUDGE
P.C. ACT (CBI09), CENTRAL DISTRICT,
TIS HAZARI: DELHI
CC No. 47/11
R.C. No. 14(A)/99
Central Bureau of Investigation
Versus
1. Shri R.L. Prasad,
S/o Late Yumana Prasad,
R/o D1/139140,
Sector16, Rohini,
Delhi.
2. Smt. Janki Prasad. ( Expired )
W/o Shri R.L. Prasad,
R/o D1/139140,
Sector16, Rohini,
Delhi.
3. Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad
S/o Shri R.L. Prasad,
R/o D1/139140,
Sector16, Rohini,
Delhi.
Date of Institution : 08.01.2002
Date of reserving Judgment : 14.07.2014
Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2014
C.C. No. 47/11 1 of 143
JUDGEMENT
Preliminary Accused No. 1 Shri R.L. Prasad is the Public Servant, who was working as Stores Officer, AIIMS, New Delhi, has been primarily charge sheeted for having committed the offence punishable under section 13(2) read with section13(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Accused No. 2 Smt. Janki Prasad, is the wife of Accused No. 1 Shri R.L. Prasad, who passed away at the fag end of trial, and Accused No. 3 Sh. Jaswant K L Prasad is his son, who have been chargesheeted as abettors of the commission of the above offence by the publicservant Accused No.1 Sh. R L Prasad. As Accused No. 2 Smt Janaki Prasad passed away during the trial , the proceeding against her stood abated on 15/01/2014. This judgment is,therefore, directed only against the Accused No.1 Sh. R.L. Prasad and his son Accused No.3 Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
Facts
2. There was a case registered against certain officials of AIIMS bearing No. RCDAI1000A0012 on 04.03.1999 including the accused herein Sh. R.L. Prasad, who was working as Stores Officer with AIIMS under section C.C. No. 47/11 2 of 143 120B/420 IPC and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. During the course of the investigation of the said case there was a search conducted at his residence and at his office. In the process his bank locker had also been searched. There was an inventory of those items prepared. It was followed up by making verification of the assets, which were found in the said searches. According to the investigation conducted upto that stage in the said case, it was found that Sh. R.L. Prasad accused had acquired a number of properties during the period from 1991 to 05.03.1999 and almost all immovable properties were found to be undervalued in the documents as compared to the actual cost of the land prevailing in the market during the said period. Since it was considered that prima facie accused Sh. R.L. Prasad was in possession of assets disproportionate to his known source of income, there was a written complaint made by one Sh. C.K. Sharma, Inspector, CBI, ACB, New Delhi, who was associated in the investigation of the said case, to S.P., CBI, ACB, New Delhi. On the basis of the said complaint, present case RCDAI1999A0014 was registered against accused Sh. R.L. Prasad.
3. As per the allegations in the charge sheet, it was found that the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad while working as Stores Officer, AIIMS, New Delhi C.C. No. 47/11 3 of 143 during the period 01.01.1990 to 05.03.1999 had amassed huge movable and immovable assets in connivance with his wife Smt. Janki Prasad and his son Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad abusing his position as public servant, disproportionate to the known sources of his income. Following are the details, which have been given in the charge sheet with regard to their income, assets and expenditures and also the calculation as to the disproportionate assets found in his possession:
INCOME Sl. Details of Income Amount No. (Rs.) 1 Income from Salary 5,35,547 2 Income of Jaswant K.L. Prasad S/o R.L. Prasad 3,21,903 3 Income from sale of LIG Flat 90000 5 Income from sale of Gold 3,60,000 6 Interest - received from Deposit in Bank as given below:
i SB A/C No. 30855, SBI Saraswati Vihar held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad. 1853 ii SB A/c No. 1006 with Union Bank of India, Rohini, Delhi held by 180 Neelima Prasad.
iii SB A/c No. 5774 with Indian Oversead Bank, Rohini, Delhi by RL 654 Prasad.
iv PPF A/c No. 547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, Delhi held by R.L. Prasad 53539
v SB A/c No. TPA 933 with SBI, Sansari Nagar, ND held by R.L.
Prasad 1980.99
C.C. No. 47/11 4 of 143
vi SB A/c No. 045199 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, ND held by R.L. Prasad 3397.31
vii SB A/c No. TPS145 with SBI, Delhi Univesity, ND held by R.L.
Prasad 4261.14
viii SB/Ac No. 23911 with PNB, Green Park, New Delhi held by R.L.
Prasad 3289
ix SB A/c No. 014922 with SBI, Saraswati Vihar, Delhi held by R.L. 4095.14
Prasad.
x SB/Ac No. 6225 with OBC Rohini, Delhi held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad 1076
xi SB A/c No. 6238 with OBC, Rohini, Delhi held by Mrs. Janki Prasad 859
xii SB A/C No. 5546 with South India Bank Ltd. Rohini held by Jaswant
K.L. Prasad. 448
7 Income from Sale of matured NSCs purchased on 27.01.1986 14105
8 GPF Withdrawals 69840
9 Withdrawals made by Smt. Janki Prasad from her knitting business. 84000
10 Interest from deposits in post pffice, Timarpur, new GPO
a) A/c No. 970621 held by Smt. Janki Prasad 6549.10
b) A/C No. 3000143 held by Sh. R.L. Prasad 60.95
c) A/c No. 999830 held by Janki Prasad. 294.85
11 Pension and Gratuity of R.L. Prasad. 174645
12 Income from Rent 83300
ASSETS:
Sl. Details of Income Amount
No.
(Rs.)
1 D1/139, Sector, 16, Rohini. 424925
2 D1/140, Sector, 16, Rohini. 443300
C.C. No. 47/11 5 of 143
3 DDA MIG Flat No. D10/14, Rohini, Delhi. 364760
4 500 Sq. Yard Plot at Faridabad. 225000
5 85 Sq. Yard plot at Mukandpur. 17000
6 170 Sq. Yard Plot at Mukand pur in 1993. 34000
7 Plot No. C1/190, Sector, 16, Rohini. 30000
100 Sq. Yard plot in New Jagriti Enclave Sehkari Awas Samiti, 8 Ghaziabad. 36200 9 Maruti Car No. UP 15F 4314 214764 10 Bajaj Classic Scooter No. DL8SE 4625 24527 11 House Hold articles. 105400 12 Recovery of Cash. 663065 13 NSC No. 6 NS/J 4EE No. 087354 dt. 25/3/97 from SubPost Office, Timapur in the name of R.L. Prasad.
10000 14 MSC NO. 6 NS/JOEE 907090 dt. 24/2/95 from Subpost office, 10000 Timpuar in the name of R.L. Prasad.
15 NSC No. 6 NS/J7 DD 748576 dt. 10/3/1997 purchased from sub post office Timarpur in the name of Jaswant K.L. Prasad.5000
16 Three KVPs No. 5 ½/07 AA 5JJ2JJ to 5JJ2J3 of Rs. 1000/ each 30000 dated 2/5/95 from Subpost office Timpar Pur in the name of Neelima Prasad D/o R.L. Prasad.
17 KVPs No. 5 ½/2 JBBJ20394 dt. 2/5/95 from Subpost office Timpar 5000 Pur in the name of Neelima Prasad D/o R.L. Prasad 18 STDR No. SD/A/3 212394 dt. 2.2.98 of SBI, Delhi Univesity, New 25336 Delhi in Joint Name of R.L. Prasad and Smt. Janki Prasad.
19 STDR No. A/39, 572684 dt. 5/9/98 in the name of R.L. Prasad. 70000 20 One deposit receipt No. CSP/A/572107 dt. 19/7/97 of Oriental Bank 2500 of Commerce Rohini, Delhi in the name of J.K.L. Prasad S/o R.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 6 of 143
21 One FD receipt No. 7198 dt. 11198 in the name of R.L. Prasad. 6000
22 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. TPS/145 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, held
by R.L. Prasad.
55757.73
23 Bank Balance in SB A/C No. 01190045199 with SBI Ansari Nagar, 12495.34
N.D. Held by R.L. Prasad.
24 Banak Balance in SB A/C No. 01190014922 with SBI, Saraswati 1535.30
Vihar, N.D. Held by R.L. Prasad.
25 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. TPS933, with SBI DU, Delhi held by 572.09
Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
26 Balance balance in SB A/c No. 5546 with South India Bank Ltd. held 3748
by R.L. Prasad.
27 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. 1006 with Union Bank of India, Rohini 513
held by Neelima Prasad.
28 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. 23911 with PNB, Green Park, N.D. Held 20370.5
by R.L. Prasad.
29. Bank Balance in PPF A/c No. 547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar held by 122831.40 R.L. Prasad.
30 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. 6225 with Oriental Bank of Commerce, 33554 Rohini held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
31 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. 5774 with Indian Overseas Bank 19228 Commerce held by Smt. Janki Prasad.
32 Bank Balance in SB A/c No. 5774 with Indian Overseas Bank, CRPF 5961.21 Ext. Counter, Rohini, Delhi held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
Deposit in A/C No. 970719 at Post Office Timarpur held by Smt. 33 Janki Prasad. 50000 34 Deposit in A/C No. 970621 at Post Office Timparpur held by Smt. 50000 Janki Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 7 of 143 Deposit in A/C No. 970685 at Post Office Timapur held by R.L. 35 Prasad. 50000 Deposit in A/C No. 3000143 at Post Office Timarpur held by R.L. 36 Prasad. 954.14 TOTAL OF ASSETS Rs. 31,74,297.72 EXPENDITURE :
Sl. Details of Income Amount
No.
(Rs.)
1 Expenditure on education of his son Rahul Prasad in Nav Bharati 22765
School, Rohini.
2 Education of Rahul Prasad from Remal Public School, Rohini 8750
3 Rent of Locker No. 6225, PNB, Green Park Extn., New Delhi. 2500
4 Stamp Paper purchased by R.L. Prasad for preparation of sale deed 3190
of property No. C171, Sharda City Colony.
5 Purchase of Cylinder, DPR from Priyanka Gas Agency, Rohini 950
6 Insurance on Policy of Maruti Car No. UP 5F 4315 from 18.111997
to 17.11.198 & 18.11.1998 to 17.01.1999
6529
7 Refil of gas Cylinder from Rohit Gas Agency, Rohini 696
8 Policy Premium of Bajaj Classic Scooter from 4297 to 3798 405
9 Security money of Cylinder LPG to Puneet Gas Services, Rohini. 900
10 Monthwise gas refill charges from Puneet Gas Services, Rohini
from 121198 to 12299
560
11 Stamp Paper purchased by R.L. Prasad on 300698 for preparation 34875
of sale deed while purchasing plot at Faridabad.
C.C. No. 47/11 8 of 143 LIC Policy Premium of Jaswant K.L. Prasad on Policy No. 12 111652864 47766 13 Colour T.V., Panasonic purchased from Shree Ram Electrovision (P) 9500 Ltd. by R.L. Prasad 14 Kitchen Stand purchased from Kitchen Plaza, Wazirpur. 920 15 Videocon washing machine purchased from Hindustan Traders, 7500 Green Park, New Delhi.
House Tax Paid on Flat No. D10/14, Rohini, Delhi from 3491 to 16 18998. 18943 17 House hold expenditure 33% of income from salary. 176730.51 18 Telephone charges on Ph. No. 7295625 18954.4 19 Booking Exp. On purchase of Indica Car by R.L. Prasad which has 10758 been forfeited.
20 Purchase of LIG Flat No. 111, Pocket, H5, Sector16, Rohini from 85000 Nayan Singh on 17121993 in the name of Jaswant K.L. Prasad through GPA.
21 Instalment paid towards purchased of SFS Flat in Sector23, 247500 Pocket6, Category II, FF Rohini, Delhi on 13996.
22 Amount spent on marriage of R.L. Prasad's daughter. 59840 23 An amount of Rs. 16,518/ repaid to M/s Umang Leasing & Credit 16518 Company Ltd. towards purchase of LML Scooter No. AL 8SK 8098.
24 Expenditure on maintenance of Maruti Car UP 15F 4315 3367.16 25 Expenditure on maintenance of Maruti Car UP 15F 4315 5745.16 26 Premium paid to National Insurance Co. NOIDA in r/o Maruti Car UP 7175 15 F 4315 27 Amount paid towards registration of Maruti Car UP 15 F 4315 798687.23 C.C. No. 47/11 9 of 143 CALCULATION OF DISPROPORTIONATE ASSETS OF R.L. PRASAD Income : Rs. 18,15,877.48 Assets : Rs. 31,74,297.72 Expenditure : Rs. 7,98,687.23 Likely Savings : Income - Expenditure = Rs. 10,17,190.25 Disproportionate assets = Assets - Likely savings = Rs. 21,57,107.47 Disproportionate assets = Disproportionate Assets X 100 Income = 118.79%.
Thus according to the case of the prosecution accused was found in possession of disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs. 21,57,107.47.
4. The charge sheet was filed against accused Sh. R.L. Prasad for having committed offences under section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act and against the other two accused persons for the abetment of the commission of said offenses.
C.C. No. 47/11 10 of 143 CHARGES
5. On the basis of the allegations a charge was framed against the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad for committing offence under section 13(1)(e) punishable under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and a separate charge was also framed against the accused persons Smt. Janki Prasad and Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad under section 109 IPC read with sections 13(1)(e) and section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The accused persons had pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. ADMISSION OF DOCUMENTS U/S 294 Cr.P.C.
6. During the course of the trial i.e. before and after the charge was framed the Accused persons had admitted a large number of documents under section 294 Cr.P.C. thereby conceding that the said documents may be read in evidence without their formal proof. The details of the said documents are as under: C.C. No. 47/11 11 of 143 S. DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION EX. NO.
No. NO.
1. D59 FDR No. 212394 dated 02.02.1998 for Ex. P1
Rs. 25,336 of State Bank of India, Delhi
University in the name of Shri R.L.
Prasad and Smt. Janki Prasad.
2. D60 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P2
14EE 087354 dated 25.03.1997 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Shri R.L. Prasad.
3. D61 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P3
10EE 907090 dated 24.02.1995 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Shri R.L. Prasad.
4. D66 FDR No. 572684 dated 05.09.1998 for Ex. P4
Rs. 70,000/ of State Bank of India,
Ansari Nagar, New Delhi in the name of
Shri R.L. Prasad.
5. D62 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P5
21BB 120394 dated 02.05.1995 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Ms. Neelma
Prasad.
6. D63 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P6
07AA 511211 dated 02.05.1995 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Ms. Neelma
Prasad.
7. D64 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P7
07AA 511212 dated 02.05.1995 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Ms. Neelma
C.C. No. 47/11 12 of 143
Prasad.
8. D65 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P8
07AA 511213 dated 02.05.1995 for Rs.
10,000/ in the name of Ms. Neelma
Prasad.
9 D67 6 years National Savings Certificate No. Ex. P9
17DD 748576 dated 10.03.1997 for Rs.
5,000/ in the name of Shri Jaswant K.L.
Prasad.
10. D68 FDR No. 572107 dated 19.07.1997 for Ex. P10
Rs. 2,500/ of Oriental Bank of
Commerce, Rohini in the name of Shri
Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
11. D74 Documents relating to opening of account Ex. P11
with Oriental bank of Commerce, Rohini
by Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad bearing SB
A/C No.6225 and by Mrs. Janki Prasad
bearing SB A/C No. 6238.
12. D94 Documents relating to two wheeler Ex. P12
scooter No. DL8SE 4625 in the name of
Shri R.L. Prasad.
13. D98 LIC policy No. 111653864 in the name of Ex. P13
Shri R.L. Prasad.
14. D2 Complaint dated 15.03.2009 of Shri C.K. Ex. P14
Sharma, Inspector, CBI.
15. D3 Letter No. FVig/221/99 dated Ex. P15
C.C. No. 47/11 13 of 143
17.01.2000 of AIIMS alongwith its
enclosures.
16. D4 File No. F.vig/2218/97 of Vigilance, Ex. P16
AIIMS, New Delhi.
17. D5 Annual Proper returns of R.L. Prasad for Ex. P17
period 01.10.1995, 01.01.1996,
01.01.1997 submitted to AIIMS, New
Delhi.
18. D6 Letter No. Tax /RZ/2000/1378 dt. Ex. P18
24.10.2009 of MCD, Rohini regard
assessment of Flat No. D10/14,
Sector15, Rohini, Delhi.
19. D9 File No. 34 (1394)/90 of DDA, New Delhi Ex. P19
of DDA regarding Flat No. D10/14,
Sector15, Rohini.
20. D10 File No. MD 24 (1394)/90/RO/NP of DDA, Ex. P20
New Delhi of DDA regarding Flat No.
D10/14, Sector15, Rohini.
21. D11 GPF File No. 6021 of AIIMS in respect of Ex. P21
Shri R.L. Prasad.
22. D12 File No. A263/9899 of AIIMS of local Ex. P22
purchase of livery items by Shri R.L.
Prasad.
23. D13 Agreement to Sell and Purchase, GPA Ex.23
and receipt in respect of purchase of Plot
No. 139, Pocket 1, BlockD, Sector16,
Rohini, Delhi.
C.C. No. 47/11 14 of 143
24. D14 GPA, Agreement to Sell and receipt in Ex. P24
respect of purchase of plot of land
measuring area of 80 sq. yards, out of
Khasra No. 161/2, situated at Village
Mukandpur abadi of Samta Enclave,
Delhi.
25. D15 GPA , Agreement to sell and receipt in Ex. P25
respect of purchase of plot measuring
170 Sqyds, out of Khasra No. 161/2,
situated in the village of area of village
Mukand Pur, Delhi.
26. D17 Agreement Deed in respect of House Ex.P26
No.D10/14, Sector15, Rohini by Mrs.
Janki Prasad
27. D18 Receipt dated 25.06.1998, 26.02.1999 Ex. P27
and 04.03.1999 of sale of property No.
D1/139140, Sector16, Rohini by Mrs.
Janki Prasad.
28. D19 Income Tax Returns of Smt. Janki Ex. P28
Prasad.
29 D20 GPA, Agreement of Sell in respect of sale Ex. P29
of Flat No. 111, Pocket H5, Sector16,
Rohini, Delhi by Shri R.L. Prasad.
30. D21 GPA and receipt in respect of purchase Ex.P30
of Flat No.111, Pocket H5, Sector16,
Rohini by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
31. D22 Details of telephone expenses in respect Ex.P31
of telephone no.7295625 vide letter dated
C.C. No. 47/11 15 of 143
4.1.2001 from Vigilance Officer, MTNL.
32. D23 Details of interest and processing Ex.P32
charges paid by Mr. R.L. Prasad of Indica
Car to Bank of Punjab Ltd. vide letter
dated 10.1.2001.
33. D24 Letter from Engineers India Ltd. dated Ex.P33
21.12.2000 giving details of Gratuity and
PF paid to Sh. R.L. Prasad.
34. D25 Final settlement of GPF etc. of Sh. Ex.P34
Gendalal Choudhary, from CDA, Meerut.
35. D26 Letter dated 21.7.2000 of M/s Ex.P35
Medisphere Marketing Ltd. showing
details of salary etc. of Sh. Jaswant K.L.
Prasad.
36. D27 Letter dated 7.8.2000 of M/s Casil Health Ex.P36
Products Ltd. showing details of salary
etc. of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
37. D28 Details of salary etc. by Hansraj Nayyar Ex.P37
Medical India paid to Sh. Jaswant K.L.
Prasad.
38. D29 Letter dated 3.5.2000 of Priyanka Gas Ex.P38
Services, Rohini, Delhi.
39. D30 Letter dated 26.4.2000 of national Ex.P39
Insurance Company, Jhandewalan, New
Delhi, showing premium paid by Sh.
Jaswant K.L. Prasad in respect of vehicle
no.UP15F4315.
C.C. No. 47/11 16 of 143
40. D31 Letter dated 24.5.2000 of PRJ Ex.P40
Automobiles, Green Park Ext., New Delhi
in respect of purchase of Scooter bearing
Engine no.35E96E17021 by Sh. R.L.
Prasad.
41. D32 Letter dated 25.5.2000 of Rohit Gas Ex.P41
Agency, New Delhi giving details of
payment towards purchase of Gas
Connection and supply of Gas Cylinders
by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
42. D33 Letter dated 25.5.2000 of New India Ex.P42
Assurance Company Ltd. showing details
of insurance premium in respect of
Scooter bearing Engine no.17021 and
Car No.UP15F4315.
43. D34 Letter dated 22.5.2000 of New Jagriti Ex.P43
Enclave, Sahakari Awas Samiti Ltd.,
Ghaziabad, giving details of month wise
payment towards membership no.58 Plot
no.106 by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
44. D35 Letter dated 16.5.2000 of Seedheshwari Ex.P44
Builders (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., giving details of payment towards property no.C171, Sharad City, Loni, Ghaziabad, by Sh.
R.L. Prasad.
45. D36 Letter dated 15.5.2000 of LIC New Delhi Ex.P45 giving details of premium paid by Sh.
Jaswant K.L. Prasad towards Policy No. 111653864.
C.C. No. 47/11 17 of 143
46. D37 Letter dated 4.5.2000 of Rohan Motors Ex. P46
Ltd., Ghaziabad giving details of payment
for the purchase of Maruti Car having
Engine no.1401196 by Sh. Jaswant K.L.
Prasad.
47. D38 Receipt of Rohan Motors Ltd., Ghaziabad Ex. P47
giving details of payment for the purchase
of Maruti Car having Engine no.1401196
by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
48. D39 Letter dated 17.04.2000 from SBI, Ansari Ex. P47
Nagar, Delhi regarding STDR No. 572684
for Rs. 70,000/ in the name of Sh. R.L.
Prasad.
49. D42 Certificate dated 24.05.2001 of M/s Ex. P48
Umang Leasing & Credit Company Ltd.,
New Delhi regarding purchase of scooter
No. DL8SA 8098 by Shri Jaswant K.L.
Prasad.
50. D45 Bill dated 08.03.1997 of Rajendra Ex. P49
Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi in respect of
repairs of vehicle No. UP15F 4315 in the
name of Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
51. D47 Copy of registration certificate of Vehicle Ex. P50
No. UP15F 4315 in the name of Shri
R.L. Prasad.
52. D48 Receipt of Rohan Motors Ltd., Ghaziabad Ex. P51
giving details of payment for the purchase
of Maruti Car having Engine no.1401196
C.C. No. 47/11 18 of 143
by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
53. D50 Agreement to sell dated 25.06.1993 in Ex. P52
nd
respect of Flat No. 14 (2 Floor), Pocket
D10, Sector15, Rohini, Delhi in favour of
Shri R.L. Prasad.
54. D51 Sale deed dated 02.07.1998 in favour of Ex. P53
Shri R.L. Prasad.
55. D53 GPA and receipt dated 09.11.1994 in Ex. P54
respect of DDA Plot No. 140, Pocket 1,
Block De, Sector, Rohini, Delhi in favour
of Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
56. D56 Search cum seizure memo dated Ex. P55
05.03.1999.
57. D57 Search cum observation memo dated Ex.P56
05.03.1999 of H. No. 139/140, Sector16,
Rohini, Delhi.
58. D58 Letter of allotment dated 13.03.1991 of Ex. P57
Flat No. 14, Block D, Sector15, Rohini,
Delhi.
59. D41 Document related to the payment of Ex. P58
tuition fees and conveyance charges of
Rahul Prasad to Remal Public Sr.
Secondary School, Rohini.
60. D75 Account opening form of Jaswant K.L. Ex. P59A,
Prasad datd 23.07.1990, SBI Saraswati Ex. P59B Vihar, Statement of Account and & Specimen Signature card related thereo.
Ex. P59C.
C.C. No. 47/11 19 of 143
61. D90 Locker Search Memo of Jaswant K.L. Ex. P60
Prasad (running into two pages) dated
05.03.1999.
62. D95 Photocopies of Income Tax Return of Ex. P61/A
Jaswant K.L. Prasad of the year 199596, to
199697, 199798, 199899, 19992000
Ex. P61/F
and 200001 (running into six pages).
63. D96 Certificate of Insurance of Vehicle Maruti Ex. P62
800 of Jaswant K.L. Prasad bearing
Registration No. UP 15 F 4315 dated
13.11.1998.
64. D97 Certificate of salary of Jaswant K.L. Ex. P63
Prasad issued by S&S Surgicial Pvt. Ltd.
dated 20.11.1992.
65. D43 Bill of service of vehicle Registration No. Ex. P64
UP 15 F 4315 dated 11.12.1999.
66. D44 Bill of service of Vehicle Registration No. Ex. P65
UP 15 F 4315 dated 15.10.1998.
67. D49 GPA and Receipt of Rs. 1,60,000/. Ex. P66/A
&
Ex. P66/B
68. D69 GPA Agreement to Sell, Receipt of Rs. Ex. P67/A
30,000/ and two Affidavits of Sh. to Ex.
Chaman Lal. PW67/E
69. D71 One file of DDA relating to Shri Jaswant Ex. P68
K.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 20 of 143
70. D76 Letter regarding details of LPG Ex. P69
connection.
71. D77 Letter dated 22.05.2000 alongwtih three Ex. P70
annexures of M/s Seedheshwari Builders
Pvt. Ltd.
72. Part of D92 Cheque No. 463140 dated 09.07.1996 in Ex. P71 the sum of Rs. 2,44,492/.
PROSECUTION WITNESSES
7. As a result of the admission of the above documents a lot of time of the Court was saved and the number of witnesses to be examined in this case were substantially reduced. The prosecution had examined only 41 witnesses in this case.
8. Witness PW1 Sh. Pravin Kapoor, partner of M/s Khairati Ram Desh Raj dealing in gold jewellery had proved carbon copy of the voucher Ex. PW1/B by which he had purchased the jewellery from the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad and made payments to him by cheque of Rs. 1,16,043/ on 16.05.1996.
C.C. No. 47/11 21 of 143
9. Witness PW2 Smt. Kanta Sachdeva, who was working as Junior Accounts Officer, GPF Section of AIIMS in the year 1999 had deposed that accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had applied for a nonrefundable withdrawal of Rs. 15,000/ for purchase of a house at Ghaziabad, New Jagriti Enclave. A loan, however, of Rs. 10,000/ only was sanctioned which was disbursed to him through a cheque dated 01.06.1993 after it had been sanctioned vide sanction order Ex. PW2/A1. Similarly, she had deposed that on the request of Sh. R.L. Prasad a refundable loan of Rs. 10,000/ was given to him vide sanction order Ex. PW2/A2 for the marriage of his niece and also a refundable loan of Rs. 49,840 was sanctioned to him for the marriage of his daughter. The same were to be returned in installments of Rs. 1440/ including the previous balance of Rs. 2000/ vide sanction order Ex. PW3/A2. There was question put to her that the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had applied for a loan of Rs. 50,000/for the marriage of his son Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad in the year 1996 for which she could not given any definite answer.
10. Witness PW3 Sh. M.K. Goel, UDC working with Transport authority of NCT of Delhi at Ashok Vihar had produced a carbon copy of registration fee Ex. PW3/A1 of file Ex. PW3/A relating to a two wheeler scooter No. DL8S C.C. No. 47/11 22 of 143 E 4625. According to him there was no hypothecation of the said vehicle. He had identified the invoice Ex. PW3/A2 and copy of insurance premium receipt Ex. PW3/A3 relating to the said vehicle. From the record it appears that the vehicle was purchased from PRJ Automobiles on 11.06.1996 for Rs. 23,438/ and for its registration, registration fee of Rs. 655/ and initial insurance premium of Rs. 311/ was paid.
11. Witness PW4 Sh. Mam Chand, Senior Branch Manager, New India Assurance Company, Mother House, Yusuf Sarai, New Delhi and witness PW5 Sh. G.N. Manghi, Assistant, New India Assurance company Limited, Green Park, New Delhi had identified and proved the documents relating to the insurance premium paid by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad and Sh. R.L. Prasad in respect of the vehicles as under:
(i) Scooter Engine No. 17021 and Chassis No. 37196 of Rs. 405 for the period 04.07.1997 to 03.07.1998 paid by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
(ii) Scooter Engine No. 17021 and Chassis No. 37196 of Rs. 405 for the period 07.07.1998 to 06.07.1999 paid by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 23 of 143 (iii) Maruti Car bearing No. UP1SF4315 for the period 18.11.1998 to
17.11.1999 of Rs. 6756 by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
(iv) Maruti Car bearing No. UP1SF4315 for the period 18.11.1999 to 17.11.2000 of Rs. 4713 by Sh. R.L.. Prasad.
12. Witness PW 6 Sh. Hukam Singh, Special Assistant, Indian Overseas Bank, Prashant Vihar, Delhi had proved documents relating to the opening of account, specimen signature card and Account statement of account bearing No. SB 5774 in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad at Indian Overseas Bank, Prashant Vihar Ex. PW6/A1 to Ex. PW6/A5.
13. Witness PW7 Shri Bal Kishan, Marketing Officer from National Insurance Company Limited had identified the signatures of one Sh. B.K. Sachdeva on the different documents including the cover notes for having made payment of insurance to the National Insurance company Ltd. of vehicle No. UP15F 4315 for the period 18.11.1997 to 17.11.1998 by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad amounting to Rs. 6529/.
C.C. No. 47/11 24 of 143
14. Witness PW8 Sh. Devender Dixit from Rohit Gas Agency had deposed that as per the records of the company he had provided the details relating to the supply of the gas cylinders regarding consumer No. 19734 Ex. P41. As per the details provided a sum of Rs. 3731/ was paid for the gas cylinders.
15. Witness PW9 Sh. Mukesh Kumar, a Stamp Vendor had deposed that he knew one Stamp Vendor by the name of Pratap Singh who worked at Kashmere Gate for 45 years from 198990 and thereafter stopped coming for selling stamps. He after having examined stamp paper Ex. P26 bearing the name of Pratap Singh with serial No. of the date 25.06.1988, had deposed that in every financial year they start selling the stamps by giving the st serial No. 1 w.e.f. 1 April of the said financial year and the same goes on till st 31 March and once again as the new financial year starts they start again from serial No. 1. After seeing the serial Number on the stamp paper bearing No. 113495 dated 25.06.1998 he had stated that during this short span of 01.04.1998 to 25.06.1998 it was not possible that Pratap Singh could have sold the stamps number 113495. According to him in all probability the stamp paper was fake.
C.C. No. 47/11 25 of 143
16. Witness PW10 Shri S.K. Jain, Accounts Officer from Vidya Bharti School, Sector15, Rohini, Delhi had identified the letter Ex. PW10/A by which the information in the form of annexure Ex. PW10/B was provided to CBI by him relating to payment of fees by Sh. R.L. Prasad for his son Shri Rahul Prasad during the period 199495 to 199899 amounting to Rs. 24,765 including the refund of security deposit of Rs. 2,000/.
17. Witness PW11 Sh. Som Nath Arora, Dy. Manager, State Bank of India, Saraswati Vihar, Delhi had identified the signatures of Sh. M.L. Madan, Chief Manager on the letter Ex. PW11/A addressed to CBI providing the attested copy of the account opening form of SB A/C No. 30922 in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad, ledger containing statement of account from 1994 to 1996 and computer generated statement of account from 30.09.1996 to 30.06.1999 Ex. PW11/B to Ex. PW11/D.
18. Witness PW12 Sh. Pankaj Dhingra who was running a shop Kitchen Plaza had identified a cash memo dated 25.08.1998 Ex. PW12/A by which a kitchen stand of Rs. 920/ signed by his nephew Rupak Sethia had been sold. He, however, could not say in the crossexamination to whom the said kitchen stand was sold.
C.C. No. 47/11 26 of 143
19. Witness PW13 Sh. Laxman Singh working as UDC at AIIMS in the year 2000 had deposed that during the same time he was also working as cashier of New Jagriti Enclave Sarkari Awas Samiti Ltd., Kailash Nagar, Ghaziabad and had written the letter Ex. P43 dated 22.05.2000 to CBI giving various details of payments made by Sh. R.L. Prasad for the purpose of the plot. Alongwith the said letter he had also forwarded photocopy of ledger, share certificate, possession letter and three receipts Ex. PW13/A1 to A6. The documents were objected to being the photocopies. In the cross examination he had admitted that the said society was of the employees of the AIIMS. He had also admitted that the total cost of the plot was Rs. 30,000/. He had also admitted that the payments of installments had been made from January, 1991 to March, 1999. He had identified one notice Ex. PW13/DA signed by General Secretary of Housing Society dated 16.06.1993 demanding a sum of Rs. 20,000/ from Shri R.L. Prasad and also stating that in case the payment was not made in time an interest @ 16.25% was chargeable. He, however, could not say anything about the fact if to Shri. R.L. Prasad Rs. 10000 had been sanctioned as a loan from his Department to pay the installments to the society.
C.C. No. 47/11 27 of 143
20. Witness PW14 Sh. V.K. Kandpal had deposed that he was working as SDM, HW at Tis Hazari, Delhi and regarding some inquiries made by CBI in respect of the stamp vendor license No. 220 he had forwarded letter dated 20.03.2001 Ex. PW14/A giving all the details therein. In the cross examination he had admitted that he could not give the details of holder of the license No. 220 as the record was not available in his office at that point of time. He had admitted that the said license number was issued in June / July, 1993 but he did not know to whom it was issued. He could not say that the said license number was issued to one Pratap Singh, Stamp Vendor.
21. Witness PW15 Shri Rajpal son of Sh. Budh Ram, Sub Post Master, Kamla Nagar Post Office, Delhi had deposed that from 1973 to 2007 he was posted at GPO, Kashmere Gate, Delhi. He had identified statement of deposits and interest in two saving bank accounts and three term deposits in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad and Smt. Janki Prasad Ex. PW15/A. The fixed deposit No. 970621, 970685, 970719 were opened for five years on 05.03.1999. SB Account No. 3000143 and Account No. 999830 were having balance of Rs. 954.15 and Rs. 1906.90 respectively on 05.03.1999.
C.C. No. 47/11 28 of 143
22. Witness PW16 Sh. Raj Kumar had deposed that he was working as Stamp Vendor since 1981 and was selling stamp papers at Kashmere Gate. He was shown the Agreement dated 25.06.1998 executed on a stamp paper of Rs. 2/. After looking on the stamp over the stamp paper he had deposed that it was sold by Pratap Singh who was having a seat near his seat but he could not say who had signed on this stamp paper. According to him Pratap Singh had stopped selling stamp papers 199092.
23. Witness PW17 Shri Mulk Raj, Vigilance Officer, MTNL had identified the letter Ex. P13 by which he had forwarded the details of the payments to MTNL in respect of telephone No. 7295626 as provided in Ex. PW17/1 to Ex. PW17/5 prepared by Accounts Officer. As per the record the said telephone was installed in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad at his address at D1/139140, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi. In the crossexamination witness could not say that the said telephone was a government telephone provided by AIIMS to the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. He also could not identify the signatures of the officer who had signed the details of the payments Ex. PW17/1 to Ex. PW17/5.
C.C. No. 47/11 29 of 143
24. PW18 Shri Kaushal Kishore Gupta had identified Power of Attorney dated 26.01.1992 Ex. P26 executed by him in favour of Sh. R.L. Prasad and also the Agreement to sell for sale of the same date Ex. PW18/1 executed by him in favour of Sh. R.L. Prasad. Similarly, he had also identified the receipt for Rs. 17,000/ dated 26.01.1992 Ex. PW18/A. According to him by way of execution of the said documents and on receipt of Rs. 17,000/ he had sold the plot measuring 80 Sq. Yards at Village Mukand Pur,, Delhi to Shri R.L. Prasad.
25. Witness PW25 Shri Krishan Kumar working as Sales Manager at M/s Durga Store, Rohini, Delhi, which was a fair price Ration Shop during the period from 1997 to 2008, had deposed that the ration card bearing no. 149294 in the name of Shr. R.L. Prasad was not attached to their shop. According to him the shop was not dealing in the sale and purchase of kerosene and, therefore, there was no question of supplying the same against the said ration card.
26. Examination of the witness PW20 Shri Prem Raj working as Dy. Director, Lease Administration Branch, MIG, DDA, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi during the period 19971998 was though started but not concluded because C.C. No. 47/11 30 of 143 neither his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. nor the documents to be proved by him were found to be traceable.
27. Witness PW21 Sh. Surjit Singh, who was posted as LDC / UDC at the Vigilance Branch, AIIMS in the year 2005 had identified the file Ex. P16 of Sh. R.L. Prasad having the Annual Property Returns Ex. P17 filed by the accused for the years 1995 to 1997 and 1999. According to him accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had not submitted the Annual Property Returns for the year 1998. Witness had also identified the letter Ex. P21/1 by which Shri T.P. Singh, Dy. Director, Administration had forwarded the documents mentioned therein to CBI having the salary details Ex. P15 of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad for the period from 15.11.1989 to 15.03.1999 part of file Ex. P15. The statement also showed temporary advance of Rs. 50,000/ given to the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad vide Ex. P15/2. Apparently this amount received by him in his official capacity not for himself but for the purchase of livery items for the staff.
28. Witness PW22 Shri B.M. Sharma working as Accounts Officer, Rohini Zone, New Pattern, DDA, Delhi had identified the letter dated 02.01.2001 Ex. PW22/1 by which he had supplied the relevant information to CBI in the C.C. No. 47/11 31 of 143 enclosed sheet and the original account file No. MO24(1394)90/RO/NP containing noting 1 to 2/N and having correspondence pages 1 to 162 to CBI Ex. P21 and Ex. P22). He had identified the handwriting of Sh. Ramesh Chand, UDC on the statement Ex. PW22/2 running into five sheets on the basis of the office records giving details of the payments received in DDA in respect of Flat No. 14, Pocket 10, BlockD, Sector, 15, Rohini, Delhi.
29. Witness PW23 Sh. M.U. Sarwar, Assistant Commission of Rohini zone, MCD Delhi working as Assistant Assessor and Collector in Rohini Zone, MCD, Delhi in the year 2002 had identified letter Ex. P18 providing the information to Inspector, CBI in respect of proper tax amounting to Rs. 16,874/ paid for the period 03.04.1991 to 31.03.1998 relating to Flat No. D10/14, Sector15, Rohini, Delhi. As per the said letter the flat was purchased by the accused Smt. Janki Prasad on 25.06.1993 through Agreement to Sell, GPA etc. for Rs. 1,60,000/.
30. Witness PW24 Sh. Kishore Singh Bisht from LIC. Karol Bagh Branch had produced details of LIC Policy No. 111653864 in the name of the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad Ex. PW24/1 showing that the policy commenced on 18.12.1993 on annual premium of Rs. 3961/ and the insured had paid Rs. 55,727/ towards premium upto 05.03.1999.
C.C. No. 47/11 32 of 143
31. Witness PW25 Mrs. Anita Kuchroo working as Assistant Administrative Officer at LIC, Karol Bagh Branch, New Delhi had identified the status report Ex. PW24/1 referred to by the witness PW24 as having been attested by her.
32. The testimony of witness PW26 Shri S.S. Yadav is of no consequence. He had deposed that he has not aware who was Accounts Officer, CNC, AIIMS in the year 1996 to 1998. There is nothing else which has been deposed by him regarding the facts of this case.
33. Witness PW27 Sh. Surender Pal working as Manager, Punjab National Bank, Green Park, New Delhi had stated that he had handed over the certified copies of the account opening form of the SB Account No. 23911 in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad, specimen card and statement of account to Inspector of CBI Ex. PW27/2, Ex. PW27/3 and Ex. PW27/4, respectively by letter Ex. PW27/1.
34. Witness PW28 Sh. S.K. Sharma working as Inspector, Income Tax Department, New Delhi had identified the Incometax returns of A.Yrs. 19992000 and 200001 of Smt. Janki Prasad Ex. P28. According to him in C.C. No. 47/11 33 of 143 the incometax return for financial year 19992000 for A.Y. 200001 Smt. Janki Prasad had not shown any income from the sale of immovable property D10/14, Sector, 15, Rohini, Delhi.
35. Witness PW29 Shri Uttam Chand, Proprietor of M/s Priyanka Gas Service had deposed that on 08.05.1990 there was a gas connection given to the accused R.L. Prasad r/o DF1801, behind Timarpur Post Office against transfer advice note from Maharashtra. He was given 2 cylinders with one Regulator and he had paid Rs. 900 for two cylinders and Rs. 50/ for Regulator. He had provided these details to CBI vide letter dated 30.05.2000 Ex. P38.
36. Witness PW30 Shri Arvind Kumar, Sr. Assistant from State Bank of India, Delhi University Branch, Delhi had identified the account opening form and statement of account in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad Ex. PW30/2 and Ex. PW30/3 which was supplied to CBI by the A.G.M. of the Branch vide letter dated 29.11.1999 Ex. PW30/1. As per his statement as on 30.09.1999 there was a balance of Rs. 55,757/ in the said account and also an interest of Rs. 4261.14. Similarly, he had also identified the account opening from Ex. PW30/5, statement of account Ex. PW30/6 in the name of Jaswant K.L. C.C. No. 47/11 34 of 143 Prasad in the said Branch forwarded to CBI by letter Ex. PW30/4 by the A.G.M. of the Branch. As on 05.03.1999 there was a balance of Rs. 5872/ in that account.
37. Witness PW31 Shri J.K. Kalra working as Dy. Manager in State Bank of India, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi had identified the true copies of PPF account No. 457 Ex. PW31/2 and statement of SB A/C No. 01190045199 Ex. PW31/4 and account opening from Ex. PW31/3 in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad, which had been forwarded to CBI by the then Manager of the Ansari Nagar Branch, SBI bearing also signatures of Sh. A.K. Singh, Accountant Ex. PW31/1. According to him as on 08.06.1998 an amount of Rs. 1,22,831.40 including the interest was the balance in the PPF account. In the said account total of Rs. 53,539/ was towards the interest.
The witness had further identified another letter dated 23.04.1998 Ex P48 by which the information was provided to CBI with regard to STDR No. 572684 for Rs. 70,000/ issued in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad dated 05.09.,1998. Principal amount of Rs. 70,000/ was debited to the SB account No. 45199 of Shr. R.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 35 of 143
38. Witness PW32 Inspector Virender Thakran had deposed that he was posted as Inspector, CBI on deputation from 1995 to 2003. In the present case he had conducted an office search and search of locker No. 2417, Punjab National Bank, Green Park, New Delhi on the instructions of Sh. C.K. Sharma, IO of case RC No. 12/99. He had identified the search cum seizure memo dated 05.03.1999 Ex. PW32/1 by which he had seized three parcels, one STDR, one telephone diary, one folder containing some documents, visiting cards, cash of Rs. 31,000/ and two keys of the locker of the bank. Out of bunch of documents seized vide this memo he had identified in the Court one cash memo Ex. PW32/4 for the purchase of TV of make Panasonic for Rs. 9.500/ from Shriram Electrovision mentioned at Serial No. 6 of the said memo. This search according to him was conducted by him in the presence of two independent witnesses and also one Inspector Sh. R.S. Bedi of his Department. He had further identified locker operation cum seizure memo dated 05.03.1999 Ex. PW32/2 by which he had searched the locker No. 2417 at PNB, Green Park, New Delhi in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad in the presence of Sh. R.S. Bedi and two independent witnesses. According to him Sh. R.S. Bedi and Shri S.K., Jain an officer of PNB were also present at the time of search. From the search a cash amount of Rs.
C.C. No. 47/11 36 of 143 3.05 lacs, some gold jewelery and some documents were recovered which were mentioned in the said seizure memo Ex. PW32/2.
39. Witness PW33 Sh. C.K. Sharma is the complainant in this case who had conducted the search in another case RC No. 12(A)/99, CBI, ACB, New Delhi registered against one of the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. He had deposed that during the course of searches made in the said case against Sh. R.L. Prasad there were certain documents and articles seized. After the scrutiny of the said documents and articles it was found that the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad prima facie was in the possession of assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. Once he had reached this conclusion he had made the complaint Ex. P14 on the basis of which FIR Ex. PW33/A was registered by Sh. N.M. Singh, the then S.P., CBI, ACB, New Delhi.
40. Witness PW34 Shri A.S. Mann from FCI, Headquarter is one of the independent witness who had participated in the search conducted at H. No. 140, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi alongwith one of his colleagues namely, Suraj Prakash. According to his deposition at the time of search Sh. R.L. Prasad, his wife and his son were present. They had witnessed the search, on the basis of which one search cum seizure memo Ex. P55 (D56) was prepared. At the same time there was also another memo called search cum C.C. No. 47/11 37 of 143 observation memo Ex. P56 (D57) also prepared wherein the year of acquisition and the value of the articles were mentioned. Apart from the other articles recovered there was also a cash of Rs. 3,50,000/ recovered from the house of Sh. R.L. Prasad.
41. Witness PW5 Sh. R.S. Bedi posted as Inspector, CBI, ACB, New Delhi in the year 1999 had deposed that on 05.03.1999 as per the directions of the S.P. he had assisted Virender Thakran, Inspector ACBI in conducting the search of locker No. 1000 of Punjab National Bank, Green Park, New Delhi in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad, who was also joined by two other witnesses of NDMC. As per his testimony after observing all the legal formalities the locker was opened by Shri R.L. Prasad who was with him at that time using his keys. All the articles lying in the locker were inspected and a detailed list of the same was prepared and noted in the search cum seizure memo Ex. PW32/2. Out of the items mentioned in the said search cum seizure memo articles at serial No. 1 to 15 were taken out and after weighing the same were kept back in the locker. A separate seizure memo Ex. PW32/3 was prepared in relation to the said seized articles. The said memo was signed by him and other independent witnesses and also by Sh. R.S. Bedi in token of having received the copy of the same.
C.C. No. 47/11 38 of 143
42. Witness PW36 Sh. Harvinder Kumar who was working as Marketing Manager with M/s Hansraj Nayyar Medical India had identified one statement Ex. P37 issued by M/s Hansraj Nayyar Medical India where the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad was working as Sales Executive. In the statement there was reference to salary plus daily allowances, traveling expenses, telephone expenses, Xerox expenses incurred by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad in the course of his work and payments made to him in this respect. This statement also included the Diwali bonus paid to him from 1993 to 1997. The witness on the directions of the Court had provided the split of salary, HRA, bonus etc. and other expenses reimbursed to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad during the period he had served the organization of the witness from 1993 to 1998. The said details were exhibited as Ex. PW36/A. The witness had explained that the actual income of the employee only can be said to be salary, HRA, bonus and remaining referred to in the statement were only the reimbursement.
43. Witness PW37, Sh. Pankaj Kumar working as Assistant Manager with South Indian Bank Ltd. had identified the account opening form of SB A/c 5546 in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad Ex. PW37/A, certified copy of specimen signature card Ex. PW37/B, Manual pass book relating to the said C.C. No. 47/11 39 of 143 account Ex. PW37/C and also another system generated pass book of the said account Ex. PW37/4.
44. Witness PW38 Shri Mahesh Kumar Sharma, Assistant Administrative Officer, AIIMS proved the Service Book of Shri R.L. Prasad Ex. PW38/A and the Vigilance file Ex. P16 bearing the signatures of number of officials on different pages including the note sheets from page 1 to 9 Ex. PW38/B1 bearing the signatures of Dr. P.K. Dave and S. N. Bijender Kumar, Dy. Director (Administration) and Sh. S.K. Chopra, Administrative Officer (Vigilance) and similarly on the note on page No. 94 of the said file Ex. PW38/B bearing the signatures of Shri Attar Singh, Administrative Officer.
45. Witness PW39 Shri Subhash Gupta, Manager, Union Bank of India had identified the letter signed by one Shri B.S. Garg on behalf of the Manager written to CBI Ex. PW39/A and also the certified copy of the SB A/c No. 1006 in the name of Ms. Neelma Prasad Ex. PW39/B, statement of account relating to the said account Ex. PW39/C showing balance in the said account as Rs. 3,902/ as on 05.03.1999.
C.C. No. 47/11 40 of 143
46. The testimony of witness PW40 Sh. H.K. Lal @ Karan Arya, Investigation Officer of this case was recorded in part before his testimony could be concluded as he had passed away.
47. Witness PW41 Shri Alok Kumar had deposed that on 05.03.1999 when he was working as Sub Inspector with CBI, ACB, New Delhi, he was deputed to assist Sh. S.N. Subramaniam, Inspector in the investigation of RC No. 12/99, who had been authorized by Sh. C.K. Sharma, IO of the case to conduct the search of the residence of Sh. R.L. Prasad. He had accordingly, accompanied Shri Subramaniam to conduct the search at the house of the accused R.L. Prasad after the team was formed by him which included two independent witnesses as well. This witness had identified his signatures on the search cum seizure memo Ex. P55 and also on the search cum observation memo Ex. P56. The witness had also identified the signature of Shri C.K Sharma appearing on the arrest cum seizure memo of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad on Ex. PW41/A. Statement of Accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C
48. All the incriminating evidence which had come on record was put to C.C. No. 47/11 41 of 143 the accused and the statement of all the accused had been separately recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
49. During the defence evidence the defence had examined in all 23 witnesses.
50. Witness DW1 Ms. Mamta is the elder sister of the wife of the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. She had deposed that at the time of the marriage she had given Rs. 10,000/ to his sister i.e. wife of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. Out of this amount Rs. 5,000/ was from her own savings and Rs. 5,000/ she had taken from her husband.
51. Witness DW2 Smt. Rekha Nayyar is also the sister of the wife of the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. She had deposed that her sister Seema was married to Jaswant K.L. Prasad on 21.11.1996 and at the time of the marriage she had given to her sister a cash gift of Rs. 25,000/ out of natural love and affection for her. Her testimony would show that she was employee of Oriental Bank of Commerce and working as Clerk in 1996. In the cross C.C. No. 47/11 42 of 143 examination she had stated that although she was not having any documents to show of having Rs. 25,000/ from her account but according to her she had given that money from her savings after taking it out from her bank account.
52. Witness DW3 Anil Kumar is the brother of the wife of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. According to his testimony he had given Rs. 1,21,000/ in cash a couple of days before the date of marriage to the family members of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad for purchasing the house hold articles and the usual gifts given at the time of marriage. His father had given him a Maruti 800 Car in gift.
53. Witness DW4 Sh. Suraj Pahwa had deposed that he was having his Chemist Shop at New Market, Timarpur, Delhi since 199697. He knew Jaswant K.L. Prasad as he was his childhood friend and used to reside in same neighborhood and also used to pay together. In 199495 Jaswant K.L. Prasad had approached him for a personal loan of Rs. 10,000/ as he was building a house. He had given him Rs. 10,000/ by way of a cheque from his saving account No. 4252. The said money was returned to him by Jaswant K.L. Prasad in 56 years in small installments. The entire money was paid by him by 2009. All these payments were made in cash. According C.C. No. 47/11 43 of 143 to him the said bank account was no longer in operation and he had closed the same in the year 2010.
54. Witness DW5 Smt. Alka Sharma had deposed that her father Sh. K.N. Kalia and Sh. R.L. Prasad were friends and, therefore, she also knew the family of Sh. R.L. Prasad. In the year 1994 she was staying in Delhi working as a Teacher in a school and also taking part time tuitions. Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad wanted to buy a plot in Rohini and asked her for help. She had given him a cheque of Rs. 40,000/. This money was returned by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad in installments. Sometimes he used to pay Rs. 700800/ and sometimes Rs. 2,000/. In the year 1995 Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had started the construction of the said house. On being approached his father Sh. K.N. Kalia had given him Rs. 1,38,000/ by way of four drafts of different amounts over a period of time. Her father had informed her that he had given him Rs. 1,38,000/ to Jaswant K.L. Prasad and he would return the money to her. Her father had passed away in the year 1997 at Mahavir Hospital and the said money too was returned to her by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad in small installments like Rs. 1500/, Rs. 2000/ etc. By 2011 he had returned the entire amount. She had placed on record the death certificate of her father Mark D5/A. C.C. No. 47/11 44 of 143
55. Witness DW6 Sh. Attar Singh, Chief Administrative Officer, AIIMS had produced summoned record with regard to the conveyance, academic allowance, which was being payed to Group A officers working with AIIMS and also the records of news paper allowance. He had placed on record the copy of office memorandum dated 24.07.1997 and 25.03.1998 Ex. DW6/A1 showing that the conveyance and academic allowance was paid to all categories of Group A officers. He had also placed on record memos Ex. DW6/A1 to DW6/A3 with regard to the payment of conveyance allowance to officers who were maintaining their own cars / vehicles. He had placed further on record the office memo dated 17.03.1997 Ex. DW6/B with regard to the news papers / magazine allowance being paid to the officers of scientific, technical and secretarial and administrative cadres.
56. Witness DW7 Sh. B.S. Chauhan had produced memo dated 21.04.1998 Ex. DW7/A regarding reimbursement on telephone bills of Sh. R.L. Prasad, Stores Officer subject to the prescribed limit laid down by the Institute w.e.f. 02.12.1997.
57. Witness DW8 Mrs. Neelima Sharma had deposed that she was the daughter of Sh. R.L. Prasad. She had stated that Kisan Vikas Patras on C.C. No. 47/11 45 of 143 record Ex. P5 to P8 were in her name and the total amount spent on purchasing the said KVPs came from her own savings out of the money, which she used to receive as traditional cash gifts on various occasions like, Birthdays, Rakshabandhan, Biaiya Dooj and such other festivals from her brothers and other family members. She had given this money to her father who had spent it for purchasing of the KVPs in her name.
58. DW9 Mrs. Meena Singh had deposed that she was the daughter of Sh. R.L. Prasad. According to her testimony her first child was born on 25.03.1999. At that time she was staying at the residence of her father. She had come to stay with her father for a period of week before the delivery. She had stated that though she did not remember the date of the raid but at that time she was staying with her father and she was pregnant. When she woke up in the morning she found some outsiders in the house and thought that perhaps they were some guests. Thereafter they had started searching the house. They had started also making inquiries from her. She had informed that she had come for delivery and was staying with her father as she was pregnant. They had checked her purse also and taken out Rs. 20,000/ from it but she had requested them not to take away the money. She had informed that this money was given to her by her husband for delivery. She C.C. No. 47/11 46 of 143 had pleaded with them if they take away the money how would her father going to meet the expenses of delivery. On her so pleading they had returned Rs. 15,000/ to her and taken taken away Rs. 5,000/. She had informed that her husband in the year 1999 was working with Power Finance Corporation as Dy. General Manager.
59. Witness DW10 Sh. Suresh Kumar had deposed that he was friend of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. He had deposed that there was one flat purchased by one Choudhary Charan Singh from Smt. Janaki Devi wife of Sh. R.L. Prasad for Rs. 9.50 lacs. Initially Rs. One lac had been given as bayana for the purchase of the said flat and on that agreement he had signed as a witness. The witness had identified his signatures on the documents Ex. P26 and P27 (colly.) relating to the said transactions.
60. Witness DW11 Shr. Ashok Kumar Nayyar had deposed that he was the husband of elder sister of wife of accused Jaswant K.L. Prasad. He had stated that he was working as clerk with Punjab National Bank and posted in Meerut. As per his testimony at the time of the marriage there was a Maruti 800 car given as gift to Jaswant K.L. Prasad by his father in law late Genda Lal Choudhary. He used to generally look after all his finance related affairs.
C.C. No. 47/11 47 of 143 The said car was purchased in the name of accused Jaswant K.L. Prasad for which the finance was provided late Sh. Genda Lal. He had visited M/s Tanya Automobile Dealer with late Sh. Genda Lal Chouhdary for the purchase of the car. The car, however, was not available even in the Tatkal Scheme. Sh. Genda Lal Choudhary had, therefore, asked him to somehow arrange for he car to be gifted. He had then visited Rohan Motors, Ghaziabad who had informed him that they would in a position to make available the car in one or two days. He had accordingly informed his father in law Sh. Genda Lal. He had deposed him that in case the car was purchased in the name of Smt. Seema Rani she will have to visit Ghaziabad for this purpose and it may not be possible for her to do so because the date of marriage was close by. His father in law then had suggested to him that they may purchase the car in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. He had accordingly discussed this matter with Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad and asked him to come over to Rohan Motors, Ghaziabad on 15.11.1996. He had deposited an amount of Rs. 2 lacs something for the purchase of the car in cash. The date of marriage was 21.11.1996. Witness had identified the documents Ex. P47 and Ex. P51, the receipts of the payments which had been made to Rohan Motors, Ghaziabad for the purchase of the said car. He had pointed out that the order booking form part of the said exhibit bears his signatures at point A. On 18.11.1996 C.C. No. 47/11 48 of 143 he had visited Rohan Motors with Jaswant K L Prasad for taking the delivery of the car. On that date they did not have the tatkal stock to deliver the car. The people at Rohan Motors had then talked to Rohan Motors at Noida and informed them that they could take the delivery of the car from M/s Rohan Motors, Noida after showing the documents relating to the payment.
The Witness further had gone on to explain that his father in law had retired from the office of Controller of Defence Accounts as Sr. Auditor in June, 1995. At the time of retirement he had received Rs. 2,23,034/. He had placed on record photocopies of those record. The witness had further stated that his elder brother in law Anil Kumar in September, 1991 had gone to Saudi Arabai where he was employed as Electrician from September, 1991 till around 2000. During this period he had visited home 45 times and in between he used to send money to his father. His father in law had sold some land in the year 1992 and had received Rs. 35,000/ as per record though actually he had received Rs. One lac for selling the land. He had placed on record the photocopy of record mark DW11/2. The witness further talked about giving Rs. 1,21,000/ in cash at the time of marriage. According to his testimony on 10.11.1996 there was a meeting of the relatives specially called for the purpose of arranging the funds for the C.C. No. 47/11 49 of 143 marriage of his sister in law Ms. Seema. All the relatives had contributed and as a result of it Rs. 1,17,000/ had been collected to be used in the marriage. On the occasion of Tika i.e. on 18.11.1996 the same date on which the car was also delivered, the car was given as gift by his father in law and his brother in law Sh. Anil Kumar had given Rs. 1,21,000/ in cash. The purpose of giving cash was that Sh. Jaswan K.L. Prasad and his family could purchase furniture etc. from the said amount.
61. Witness DW12 Shri Raj Kapoor had deposed that his father Choundary Charan Singh had passed away in the year 2004. The witness had identified signatures of his father appearing on documents such as agreement and receipts Ex. P27 (colly.)
62. Witness DW13 Sh. Chothe Lal had deposed that he was having a business of Dry cleaning of clothes at his residence in the name of M/s Neha Dry Cleaners. He knows Sh. R.L. Prasad as he is the uncle (mausa) of his wife. According to him he had given a loan to him of Rs. 1,20,000/ in the year 199798. This loan he had given in five installments. This money was returned by Shr. R.L. Prasad by way of four cheques of Rs. 50,000, Rs. 30,000/ and two cheques of Rs. 20,000/ each (all of the cheque period).
C.C. No. 47/11 50 of 143 The witness had brought his savings pass book of Indian Overseas Bank where he had deposited the said cheques. The photocopies of the said documents were taken on record and collectively exhibited as Ex. DW13/A.
63. Witness DW14 Shri Shubh Narain Mishra had deposed that he knew Shri R.L. Prasad because both of them are from same village. The witness had identified his signatures on a Will Ex. PW14/A executed by Sukai Ram grandfather of Smt Janaki Prasad. According to the witness Sukhai Ram who was resident of village Manjholi had one day approached him and stated that he wanted to write a Will. Witness had taken Sukhai Ram to one Deed Writer named Nagender Pratap Narain, Advocate. As per the desire of Sh. Sukhai Ram, Shri Nagender Pratap Narain had written a Will in his presence. At that time there was one more person present named Naimulla Khan who was also from village of Sukhai Ram. After this Will was written, it was read out and explained to Sukhai Ram and thereafter Sukhai Ram had put his thumb impression on it and he and Naimulla Khan had put their signatures on the Will as witnesses. The witness had also identified the signatures of Naimulla Khan on the said Will.
C.C. No. 47/11 51 of 143
64. Witness DW15 Shri Ajay Kumar son of Late Sh. Bhagat Singh Dabas had deposed that he was a businessman running an ice cream factory. According to him he knew Sh. R.L. Prasad from childhood. His father because of his good relation with Sh. R.L. Prasad used to lend him money or take loan from him depending upon the need. Sh. R.L. Prasad had taken a friendly loan from his father sometime in 199798 of Rs. 2 lacs. Shri R.L. Prasad had returned Rs. 1,25,000/ by way of two separate cheques, one in the name of his younger brother, namely, Deepal in the year 2009 when his father was seriously ill. A day prior to the death of his father, Sh. R.L. Prasad had also given Rs. 25,000/ in cash. After his father had passed away the remaining amount of Rs. 50,000/ was paid back by Shri R.L. Prasad to him by way of a cheque in his name. The witness had produced his statement of account signed by Sr. Manager, Corporation Bank, Najafgarh Road, Nangloi Jat where he was having his account showing the entry of Rs. 50,000/ received through a cheque. The statement was marked D15/A. The witness had also identified signatures of his father on Agreement Deed Ex. P26 and receipts collectively Ex. P27.
65. Witness DW16 Shri Gulshan Rai Khullar had deposed that he was having a business of Surgical Items / goods and has a shop at 1708, Mittal C.C. No. 47/11 52 of 143 Medical Market, Bhagirath Place, Delhi. He had stated that he knew Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad because he used to visit him as he was marketing surgical products and he used to visit him for marketing his products. He had informed him that he had an SFS flat in Rohini, which he wanted to sell and the witness was also interested in buying a flat. Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad had accordingly given him his letter of allotment received from DDA in respect of the said flat. At that time only allotment letter had been issued to him by DDA and not formally sold flat to him. He had paid Rs. 1,50,000/ to Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad out of which Rs. 50,000/ was the amount that Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad had paid to DDA and remaining was Rs. One lac given to him as premium. He had deposited one installment for the purchase of the flat with DDA by a pay order of PNB. He was required to deposit four installment at the same time but since he had not read the said allotment letter carefully, therefore, after depositing one installment he did not deposit the other installment and eventually the said allotment was canceled. The witness had identified the challan Ex. P68, already on record, and stated that the said challan for deposit of Rs. 1,97,500/ was in his handwriting which he had deposited with Central Bank of India, Vikas Sadan in the account of DDA. The same was given Ex. DW16/A. In the crossexamination, however, he had clarified that this challan was not in his handwriting but it C.C. No. 47/11 53 of 143 was in the handwriting of a boy who had been working with him. He had handed over draft to this boy for being deposited with DDA. He had further explained that initial of Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad may have been put on this challan by this boy to deposit the same with DDA. The witness had also identified a letter at page No. 16 of file D71 stating that this letter was in his handwriting asking for the completion schedule of the said SFS flat though it had been signed by Shri Jaswant K.L. Prasad. According to him he had got signed this letter from Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad because at the time the flat had not been transferred and the allotment was in his name. The letter was given Ex. DW16/B. The witness had further identified a pay order Ex. PW16/C and stated that it was a pay order which was got made from PNB, Gurdawara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi where he had a SB account which was later on closed in the year 2003.
66. Witness DW17 Shri Umesh Saxena had appeared from SBI, Ansari Nagar, Delhi and had produced the attested copies of three cheques Ex. DW17/A to Ex. DW17/C drawn in favour of Chouthi Lal of Rs. 20,000/ dated 21.02.2007, Rs. 20,000 dated 29.10.2008, Rs. 30,000/ dated 25.01.2009 and Rs. 50,000/ dated 09.02.2014.
C.C. No. 47/11 54 of 143
67. Witness DW18 Shri Rajneesh Kumar working as Head Cashier with Central Bank of India, Rohini Branch had produced a cheque dated 22.10.2009 issued in favour of one Shri Deepak Kumar for Rs. 25,000/ issued from the accused No. 1668911042.
68. Witness DW19 Sh. Purshottam Singh, an Advocate practicing at District Courts Jhajjar, Haryana had identified a legal notice dated 03.03.2000 he had sent by registered post to Smt. Janki Prasad on behalf of Ch. Charan Singh. He had identified the said legal notice and also the envelope. The same was given Ex. DW19/A.
69. Witness DW20 Shri Vijay Kumar had produced the statement of account certified under the Banker's Book Evidence Act Ex. DW20/A3 with certificate Ex. DW20/A2 alongwith letter of authority Ex. DWA1 of the account of Chotey Lal at Punjab National Bank, Model Town Branch, Delhi. He had stated that an amount of Rs. 30,000/ was credited to the account of Chotey Lal on 30.01.2009.
70. Witness DW21 Shri Rajesh Kumar, clerk from Corporation Bank, Nangloi Jat Branch had produced the statement of account Ex. DW21/A3 C.C. No. 47/11 55 of 143 alongwith the certificate Ex. DW21/A2 and the letter of authority Ex. DW21/A1 of the statement of account one Shri Ajay Kumar for the period 01.01.2010 to 31.03.2010 and he pointed out that on 03.02.2010 an amount of Rs. 50,000/ was credited in this account by cheque bearing No. 0675624 issued from an account of State Bank of India through clearing.
71. Witness DW23 Shri Sudhir Kumar appearing from India Overseas Bank, Model Town Branch, Delhi had produced a statement of account Ex. DW22/A1 and A2 alongwith certificates of Banker's Book Evidence Act Ex. DW22/A3 and A4 of the account of Chothi Lal for the period 01.10.2003 to 31.03.2004 and 01.02.2004 to 31.12.2008. He had identified entries at point X1, X2 and X3 for three cheques of Rs. 50,000/, Rs. 20,000/ and Rs. 20,000/ which had been credited in the account of Chothi Lal through clearing by cheques bering Nos. 00426039 dated 09.02.2004, 354762 dated 21.02.2007 and 485338 dated 29.10.2008, respectively.
72. Witness DW23 Shri Jora Singh from Canara Bank, Rohini Sector5 Branch, Delhi had appeared and produced one bearer cheque drawn in favour of Sh. Deepak Kumar for Rs. one lac dated 22.10.2009, one statement of account and the certificate issued in support thereof under Banker's Book Evidence Act and they were exhibited as Ex. DW23/A1 to A3 respectively.
C.C. No. 47/11 56 of 143 HEARIN OF SUBMISSIONS
73. I have gone through the record of this case as well as the written submissions submitted on behalf of accused. I have also heard Ld. PP for CBI as well as Ld. Defence Counsel.
74. According to the case of the prosecution the accused was found in possession of assets of Rs.21,57,107.47 disproportionate to the known sources of income. The prosecution has named along with Sh. R.L. Prasad the public servant his son Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad and his wife Smt. Janki Prasad also as accused in this case. Therefore, the entire case has been built on the basis of the collective incomes, assets and expenditures of all the accused persons. I am proceeding to discuss the entire case as presented by the prosecution itself. The details have been given by the prosecution under three heads viz. 1) Income, 2) Assets and 3) Expenditures. I would like to take up the above issues in the following order - 1) Assets, 2) Incomes and
3) Expenditures.
C.C. No. 47/11 57 of 143 I Assets Plot No. D1/139, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi
75. The document Ex.P25 is the Agreement to Sell related to the purchase of the above plot. This plot was purchased in the name of Sh. Rahul Prasad for a sum of Rs.30,000/ and later on there was construction raised on this plot. As per the Valuation Report Ex.P19, the cost of construction of this plot was Rs.3,94,325/. If the cost of the purchase of plot is included therein the value would come to Rs.4,24,325/. It appears that the value given of this plot in the charge sheet of Rs.4,24,925/ has not been correctly stated. It should be read as Rs.4,24,325/. As per the service book of the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad the date of birth of Rahul Prasad given is 25.03.1980. Therefore, on the date of purchase of the said plot i.e on 17.11.1989 he was a minor. Thus, this asset can be attributed to Sh. R.L. Prasad.
To sum up this asset D1/139, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi, having value of Rs.4,24,325/belongs to Rs. R.L. Prasad .
C.C. No. 47/11 58 of 143 Property no. D1/140, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi
76. As per document Ex.P54 the property was purchased by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad for a sum of Rs.50,000/. The valuation report part of Ex.P19 would show that the cost of construction of this property was Rs.3,93,300. Therefore, the total cost of this property comes to Rs.4,43,300/. The documents have not been disputed.
Thus, it can be said that the property D1/140, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi of Rs.4,43,300/ is an asset of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. DDA MIG Flat D10/14
77. The above flat was purchased by Smt. Janki Prasad wife of Sh. R.L. Prasad for Rs.1,60,000/ from one Dharam Pal Somra. Though the Power of Attorney is in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad, but the Agreement to Sell is in favour of Smt. Janki Prasad. It, therefore, can be said that this property was purchased by Smt. Janki Prasad. It may further be noted that this property which was purchased had been allotted by the DDA on higher purchase basis. Meaning thereby that there were further installments to be paid to the C.C. No. 47/11 59 of 143 DDA for the period to be actually transferred in the name of Smt. Janki Prasad. There was an Agreement to Sell entered into by Sh. Chander Singh as per the document P26. As per this Agreement to Sell, the entire sale consideration was Rs.9,50,000/. Rs. One lac had been given as advance at the time of entering the Agreement. The remaining amount was to be paid within a period of one year. Smt. Janki Prasad was required to make the remaining payment of all the higher purchase installments to DDA. The DDA record Ex.P22 would show that he last installment was paid to DDA on 27.1.1999. The total payments made by way of installments from 25.06.1993 till 27.01.1999 comes to Rs.1,79,040/. Thus, the total payment which can be said to have been made by Smt. Janki Prasad to Rs.3,39,040/ which is not very different from the figure given in the charge sheet which is Rs. 3,64,760/.
To sum up the property DDA Flat can be said to have been purchased by Smt. Janki Prasad for a sum of Rs.3,39,040/.
Recovery of cash of Rs.6,63,065/
78. Since the recovery of cash is connected to the selling of the said plot to said Sh. Charan Singh, I am taking the said issue right here so as to be able to relate it to the facts stated in respect of the acquiring of the above flat.
C.C. No. 47/11 60 of 143
79. According to the prosecution a cash of Rs.6,63,065/ was recovered from the possession of the accused. As per the Search cum Seizure memo Ex.P55, Rs.3,55,000/ had been recovered from the house search of the accused on 05.03.1999 and a sum of Rs.3,05,000/ had been recovered from the locker in the joint name of Sh. R.L. Prasad and Smt. Janki Prasad at PNB, Green Park vide Seizure Memo. According to the defence this money was part of the consideration received for selling the said property. It was submitted that a sum of Rs.3,05,000/ had been received as per document Ex.P27 i.e. just a few days before the raid on 5.3.1999. It is further added that another sum of Rs.3,45,000/ had been received on 4.3.1999 just a day before the raid. The amount which was recovered from the locker vide Ex.PW32/2 was Rs.3,05,000/. It matches with the amount which was stated to have been received on 26.2.1999 towards part sale consideration of the said flat. The total amount which was shown to have been recovered from the residence of the accused is Rs.3,55,000/. Since the money Rs. 3,45,000/ was received just a day before it can be assumed that this amount of Rs.3,45,000/ was part of the total cash received. In other words, the total amount of Rs.6,50,000/ can be attributed to the part sale consideration of the said flat. There is an entry in the details of income at Sr. No.4 whereby income from the sale of LIG flat has been shown to be Rs.90,000/ and the C.C. No. 47/11 61 of 143 amount spent for the purchase of the said LIG flat has been shown at Sr. No. 20 in the list of expenditure. In my opinion on the same line the amount paid towards the sale of the said flat i.e. Rs.3,39,040/ be put on the expenditure side and the amount of cash Rs.6,50,000/ should be put on the income side and at the same time it be removed from the list of assets at Sl. 3.
80. The above document Ex.P27 would further show that there was an amount of Rs.1 lac received as part of the consideration for the sale of the said flat on 25.6.1998 itself on the day when the Agreement to Sell was entered into. This amount should also go as the income of Smt. Janki Prasad.
81. There was one witness DW9 Ms. Meena Singh daughter of Sh. R.L. Prasad examined in this case. She had deposed that on the day of raid she was at the residence of her father and was at the advance stage of pregnancy. She was having a sum of Rs.20,000/ with her which had been given to her by her husband. This money had also been seized by the Investigating Officer. On pleadings by her Rs.15,000/ had been returned to her. Though it is not stated in the Seizure Memo Ex.P55, but it is admitted that she was pregnant and there was a request made to return the money C.C. No. 47/11 62 of 143 and on such a request Rs.15,000/ had been returned. I find nothing wrong in her husband giving her Rs.20,000/ for her delivery. The meaning of it would be that out of the total cash recovered, Rs.5,000/ belonged to her. Thus, the remaining amount of Rs.8065 can be attributed as an asset of Sh. R.L. Prasad.
82. To sum up Rs.3,67,332/ be posted on the expenditure side as an amount spent for acquiring the property bearing no.D10/14. Part sale consideration received of Rs.7,50,000/ be posted on the income side (including Rs.6,50,000/ recovered as cash). Further the recovered cash in the details of assets be only confined to Rs.8065/ as the asset of Sh. R.L. Prasad.
500 Sq. Yard plot at Faridabad for Rs.2,25,000/
83. It has not been disputed that vide document Ex.P53 S. R.L. Prasad had purchased the said plot of 500Sq. Yards at Faridabad for a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/.
C.C. No. 47/11 63 of 143 Plot of 85 Sq. Yards at Mukundpur
84. It is not disputed that a plot of 80 Sq. Yard had been purchased by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad vide document Ex.P26 at Mukundpur, Delhi for a sum of Rs.17,000/ on 26.11.1992. I would like to here just mention one more fact. The prosecution had examined two witnesses PW9 and PW 26 to establish that the stamp papers used for executing the documents were fake. It has really not been explained as to what purpose it was to serve that the said stamp papers were fake. It also be noted that the investigating officer had also at the same time examined the seller of the said plot PW 18 Sh. Kaushal Kishore Gupta, who had confirmed that the said plot was sold by him to Accused R.L. Prasad for the same amount i.e. Rs.17,000/. I consider the examining the said two witnesses to be of no consequence as far as the case of the prosecution is concerned.
Plot of 170 Sq. Yards at Mukundpur
85. It is not disputed that as per the document Ex.P27 a plot of 170 S1. Yards was purchased at Mukundpur by Sh. R.L. Prasad in 1991 for a sum of Rs.34,000/.
C.C. No. 47/11 64 of 143 Plot No.C1/190, Sector16, Rohini, Delhi
86. It has not been disputed that on 6.12.1996 Smt. Janki Prasad had purchased the said plot for a sum of Rs.30,000/ vide Ex.P67/A. 100 Sq. Yards Plot at New Jagriti Enclave, Sehkari Awas Smiti, Ghaziabad.
87. As per Ex.P43 accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had taken a membership of the said Samiti and during the period from 23.5.1991 to 22.8.1996 and he had paid a sum of Rs.36,200/. The same has not been disputed by the accused.
To sum up Rs.36,200/ on account of paying the membership subscription for the said plot be retained as an asset. Maruti 800 Car
88. There is no dispute that this car is in the name of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad as per the documents Ex.P46, P47, P50 and P51. The explanation, however, given is that this car was given as a gift by his inlaws. This explanation was not accepted by the Investigating Officer, as stated in C.C. No. 47/11 65 of 143 the charge sheet because the father in law of the accused Jaswant K.L Prasad did not have sufficient money in his hands to gift the car. It is stated that he had received retirement benefits of Rs.1,81,988/ about a year back in June, 1995.
89. As per the testimony of Sh. Anil Kumar DW3 brother in law of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad and the testimony of the witness DW11 Sh. Ashok Kumar Nayyar co brother of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad, the marriage of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad took place on 21.11.1996. As per the documents referred above, the car was booked on 15.11.1996 and delivered on 18.11.1996. The witness DW11 had stated signature on the booking form was his. The explanation for booking the car in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad given by witness DW11 was that the car was purchased in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad and not in the name of his wife as the said car was purchased just a few days before her marriage, therefore, it would not have been possible for her to visit the Dealer to take the delivery of the car.
90. Sh. Genda Lal father in law of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had been cited as a witness in this case, but he could not be examined because he had passed away before he could be examined in the Court. I am of the C.C. No. 47/11 66 of 143 view that he was the best person in the given circumstances to state whether he had the means or not to gift the said car to accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad at the time of the marriage. In any case in the normal set of circumstances, it is unthinkable that just a few days before the marriage accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad would have purchased the car from his own pocket. In my opinion it could have been given only from his in laws as has been deposed by the defence witnesses DW3 Sh. Anil Kumar brother in law of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad and DW11 Sh. Ashok Kumar Nayyar his cobrother. If it were to be considered as an asset in the hands of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad, then since the money came from his fatherin law, the amount involved in the purchase of the car can be considered to be a gift received in the hands of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad and thus, added on the income side.
91. To sum up I am retaining Maruti 800 car no. UP15 F4315 of the value of Rs.2.14,764/ as an asset of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad, but at the same time I am adding this amount as income, as gift received from his father in law.
C.C. No. 47/11 67 of 143 Bajaj Classic Scooter DL 8SE 4625
92. It has not been disputed that this scooter was purchased by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad vide document P40 for a sum of Rs.24,527/. Household articles worth Rs.1,05,400/
93. It has been claimed by the defence that the Investigating Officer while making calculations on this account included the value of the articles purchased prior to the check period, which according to the defence comes to Rs.22,500/. Although in the charge sheet the calculation has not been given as to how this figure of Rs.1.05,400/ has been arrived at, but for my own satisfaction I have calculated the value of all the items as mentioned in the Search cum Observation memo Ex.P56. The total value of all the articles comes to Rs.1,39,150/ , out of which the total value of the articles of the period prior to the check period comes to Rs.33,350/. If I deduct the two, the value comes to Rs.1,05,800/ which is approximately the same as given in the charge sheet. Thus, in my opinion, though in the Observation Memo all the articles may have been mentioned including those acquired before the check period, but while making the calculation the Investigating Officer had C.C. No. 47/11 68 of 143 taken into account the value of only those articles which were acquired during the check period. Thus, no benefit of Rs.22,500/ (though this figure should have been Rs.33,500/ if one were to go with the logic given by the defence) can be given to the accused.
94. To sum up since it is a matter of calculation only, I would take the value of the household articles acquired during the check period as Rs.1,05,800/ instead of Rs.1,05,400/ given in the charge sheet. National Saving Certificates in the name of R.L. Prasad and Jaswant K L Prasad.
95. It has not been disputed that as per Ex.P2 and Ex P3 NSCs of Rs. 10000/ each are in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad. It is also not disputed that NSC Ex P9 of Rs.5000/ is in the name of Jaswant KL Prasad. The said assets,therefore be retained as such in the list.
Three Kishan Vikas Patras of Rs.1,000/ each dated 2.5.95 in the name of Ms. Neelima Prasad.
96. There are two issues involved here, one that the figure of Rs.30,000/ given appears to be by mistake. As per the three Kisan Vikas Patras on C.C. No. 47/11 69 of 143 record Ex.P6, P7 and P8 they all are of Rs.1,000/ each and, therefore, their value would be Rs.3,000/ and not Rs.30,000/. The other issue involved is that Ms. Neelima who is the daughter of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had appeared in the case as witness DW8 and stated that these Kishan Vikas Patras of similar amounts were purchased in her name out of the money from her own savings which she used to receive on different occasions and festivals from time to time. It is true that in the families the girls do receive some traditional gifts on different festivals and occasions. I am prepared to accept this explanation. Thus, the amount of Rs.30,000/ may be completely taken off as an asset from the list of assets.
Kisan Vikas Patra of Rs.5,000/ in the name of Nilima Prasad.
97. This Kisan Vikas Patra of Rs.5,000/ is also in the name of Ms. Neelima Prasad. Her explanation as to this Kisan Vikas Patra was the same as for the other three Kisan Vikas in above para. As stated above that it is true that the girls in the family do get some traditional cash gifts from time to time on some festivals, but it does not appear to me that they would go upto Rs.8,000/ in a year if one were to include the above amount of Rs.3,000/ also. Therefore, as far as this Kisan Vikas Patra is concerned, in my opinion C.C. No. 47/11 70 of 143 this money would have gone from Sh. R.L. Prasad only. Therefore, I am inclined to retain this amount of Rs.5,000/ as an asset of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad.
FDRs of Rs. 25,336/ at State Bank of India, Delhi University in the joint name of R.L. Prasad and Janki Prasad, FDR of Rs. 70,000/ at State Bank of India, Ansari Nagar in the name of R.L. Prasad and FDR of Rs. 25,00/ at Oriental Bank of Commerce, Rohini in the name of Jaswant K. L. Prasad.
98. I have seen the documents Ex. P1, EX. P4 and Ex. P10 respectively relating to the above FDRs. All these FDRs are admitted documents. It can, therefore, be said that they had been correctly included in the list of documents.
F.D Receipt No.7198 dated 11.01.1998 in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad - Rs.6,000/
99. I have not been able to find this document on record despite best of the efforts. This document is also not mentioned in the list of documents submitted along with the charge sheet. In the absence of any document such amount cannot be attributed to accused Sh. R.L. Prasad.
To sum up this amount may be removed from list of the assets.
C.C. No. 47/11 71 of 143 Bank Balance in the SB account No.TPS/145 with SBI, Ansari Nagar - Sh. R.L. Prasad
100. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW30/3 the total amount shown as on 3.3.99 was Rs.55,757.73. The statement of the witness PW30 Sh. Arvind Kumar and also the said Statement of Account would show that the amount of Rs.4,261/ had been paid as interest during the said period. This amount in my view needs to be deducted from the value of the assets as it would form part of the income which appears to have been taken care of in the details of income given.
101. To sum up the amount of Rs.4,261/ should be deducted from the value of this assets. It would come out to be Rs. 51496. The same accordingly be mentioned in the list of assets.
Bank balance in SB account No.01190045199 at SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi - R.L. Prasad
102. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW31/4 the last balance shown is Rs.12495.34. As per the testimony of the witness PW31 an interest of Rs. 3397.31 had been included. I am of the view that this amount of interest is to C.C. No. 47/11 72 of 143 be counted towards the income and not the asset. It has actually been so shown in the details of income given. This amount of interest should, therefore, be deducted from the amount of Rs.12495.34.
103. In turn, to sum up, this amount of Rs.3397.31 should be deducted from the value of asset. It would be come out to be Rs.9098/. The same accordingly be mentioned in the list of assets.
Bank balance in SB Account No.0119004922 at SBI, Saraswati Vihar, New Delhi - R.L. Prasad
104. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW11/D and the statement of witness PW11 Sh. Somnath Arora the total balance in this account as on 31.12.98 was Rs.1535.30 and during the check period an amount of Rs. 4095.14 had accrued as interest which has been rightly shown in the income column.
105. To arrive at the correct value of asset on this count one will have to deduct Rs. 4095/ the interest shown in this account from the balance found in this account i.e. Rs. 1535.30. The amount one would arrive by such an exercise would be a negative balance in this account. Meaning thereby that C.C. No. 47/11 73 of 143 the amount of Rs. 1535.30 is nothing but residue of the income left in this account accrued from interest after the actual amount deposited in this account and a part of the interest accrued had been utilized somewhere else. In other words the balance appearing in this account in real terms is not an asset. This amount, therefore, be shown as Zero asset. Bank balance in account no. TPS933 SBI, DU, Delhi - Rs.572.09 Jaswant K.L. Prasad
106. As per Ex.PW30/6 statement of account is the balance in this account was Rs.572.09. The interest which had been accrued in this account was Rs.1980.90. On the basis of the above reasoning, the value of the assets remaining in this account is to be treated as zero.
Bank balance in SB Account No.5546, South Indian Bank Ltd., Delhi - Jaswant K.L. Prasad
107. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW37/C as on 28.2.1999 the total balance in this account was Rs.3748/. An interest of Rs.448/ had accrued in this account during the check period. The same has been rightly shown in the income column.
C.C. No. 47/11 74 of 143
108. In my opinion this amount of Rs.448/ be deducted from the balance shown in this account. It would come out to be Rs.3300/. This be treated as the value of this asset.
Bank balance in SB account no.1006 with Union Bank of India, Rohini - Rs.513 - Ms. Neelima Prasad
109. In this account as per Ex.39/C the total balance was Rs. 513 out of which Rs.180 was the interest. Thus value of this asset would be Rs. 333/. This be taken as the value of this asset.
Bank balance in SB account no.23911 with PNB, Green Park, New Delhi
- R.L. Prasad.
110. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW27/4 the last balance shown is Rs.20370.50. As per the testimony of the witness PW27 an interest of Rs. 3289/ had been included in this balance. I am of the view that this amount of interest is to be counted towards the income and not the asset. It has actually been so shown in the details of income given. This amount of interest should, therefore, be deducted from the amount of Rs.20,370.50.
111. In turn, to sum up, this amount of Rs.3289/ should be deducted from the total value of assets, which would come out to be Rs.17081/. The same be taken as the value of the asset.
C.C. No. 47/11 75 of 143 Bank balance in PPF account no.547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar - R.L. Prasad
112. The balance shown in this account is Rs.1,22,831.40. It was submitted on behalf of the defence that in this amount even the deposits prior to the check period have been included. It seems that it does include the amount prior to the check period. On calculation it comes to Rs.13,817/ which includes the interest of Rs.1717/.
113. I am of the view that the amount of income as interest of Rs.1717/ should be deducted from the income on account of interest given from this PPF account as having accrued prior to the check period. At the same time the remaining amount of Rs.12100/ should also be deducted from the asset of Rs.1,22,831.40 given against this entry in the charge sheet. The account would show that during the check period the interest which was accrued was Rs.51,822/. This in my opinion can only be reflected as an income and not as an asset. Therefore, this amount should also be deducted from the asset shown against this entry. I find in this PPF account the first entry of the check period is of March 1991 where in after adding the interest of Rs. 1627/ the balance is shown to be Rs. 15444.40. It means that the asset being shown in this account as on 30.03.1991 of Rs. 13817/ had not been C.C. No. 47/11 76 of 143 acquired from the income during the check period, therefore, it is necessary that this amount be taken off as an asset and added as a part of the probalized @ income at the beginning of the check period. ( see under the heading probablized income at the beginning of the check period)
114. To sum up an amount of Rs.64,022/ (Rs.12100 of pre check period + Rs.51822/ towards interest) should be deducted from the asset of Rs. 1,22,831/ shown as asset against this entry. The same would come out to be Rs.58,909/. From this amount further the amount of Rs. 13817/ be further deducted as noted above this amount has no relationship with the income of the check period. Ultimately the amount on this score to be added as an asset would be 45092/.
Bank balance in SB account no.6225 with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Rohini, New Delhi - Jaswant K.L. Prasad
115. As per the Statement of Account Ex.P11 the last balance shown is Rs. 33554/. As per this document an interest of Rs.1076/ had been included. I am of the view that this amount of interest is to be counted towards the income and not the asset. It has actually been so shown in the details of income given. This amount of interest should, therefore, be deducted from the amount of Rs.33554/.
C.C. No. 47/11 77 of 143 In turn, to sum up, this amount of Rs.1076/ should be deducted from the total value of assets which comes to Rs. 32478/ Bank balance in SB account no.6258 with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Rohini, New Delhi - Janki Prasad
116. As per the Statement of Account Ex.P11 the last balance shown is Rs. 19228/. As per this document an interest of Rs.859/ had been included. I am of the view that this amount of interest is to be counted towards the income and not the asset. It has actually been so shown in the details of income given. This amount of interest should, therefore, be deducted from the amount of Rs.19,228/.
In turn, to sum up, this amount of Rs.859/ should be deducted from the total value of assets which comes to Rs.18369/. Bank balance in SB account no.5774 with Indian Overseas Bank, Rohini, New Delhi - Jaswant K. L. Prasad
117. As per the Statement of Account Ex.PW6/A3 to A5 the last balance shown is Rs.5961.21. As per the testimony of the witness PW6 an interest of Rs.654/ had been included. I am of the view that this amount of interest is to C.C. No. 47/11 78 of 143 be counted towards the income and not the asset. It has actually been so shown in the details of income given. This amount of interest should, therefore, be deducted from the amount of Rs.5961.21.
In turn, to sum up, this amount of Rs.654/ should be deducted from the total value of assets which comes to Rs. 5307/ Deposit in A/c No.970719 and A/c No.970621 in the name of Smt. Janki Prasad at post office Timarpur, Delhi (Rs.50,000/ + Rs.50,000/), Deposit in A/c No.970685 and A/c No.3000143 in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad at post office Timarpur, Delhi (Rs.50,000/ + Rs.954.15)
118. The said deposits have not been disputed by the defence as per the details given in Ex.PW15/A. So far as the interest part is concerned, that has been separately shown as an income in the charge sheet and it does not appear that the said amounts include the interest part also. They have been rightly included in the assets.
II INCOME Income from salary of Sh. R.L. Prasad
119. It has been submitted that the calculation of the income from salary Rs. 5,35,547/ for the check period as given in the charge sheet is not correct.
C.C. No. 47/11 79 of 143 According to him it should be Rs.5,69,034/. I have gone through the
statement of salary on record Ex.P15. This statement shows the details of the salary received by Sh. R.L. Prasad from November 1989 to March 1999. I have calculated the salary of Sh. R.L. Prasad for the check period from 1.1.1991 to March 1999. The same comes to Rs.5,35,547/. I find nothing wrong in the figure given by the Investigating Officer in the charge sheet on this count.
Income of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad S/o Sh. R.L. Prasad from his salary - Rs.3,21,903/.
120. The record would show that the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad from 1993 till 1999 was employed with three organizations. Medisphere Marketing Ltd. from June 1993 to July 1993 as per Ex.P35. During this period he is stated to have earned the salary of Rs.2,493/. The same has not been disputed. From 19.8.98 to 1.02.99 he had worked with one M/s Casil Health Products Ltd. and as per Ex.P36 he was employed at a salary of Rs. 4235/ per month. Though the exact figure has not been given but would approximately come out out to be Rs. 22587/ From August 1993 to February 1998 he had worked with M/s Hansraj Nayyar Medical India as per Ex.P37. As per Ex.P37 during this period he had received a salary of Rs.
C.C. No. 47/11 80 of 143 3,00,997/. The Ld. Prosecutor had examined PW36 from M/s Hansraj
Nayyar Medical India and had asked him to produce a split of details of salary. He had furnished the same, which was exhibited as Ex.PW36/A. The examination of the witness would show that the Ld. Prosecutor for CBI wanted to make a clear distinction as to the salary having been received and the reimbursement which the accused may have received of some expenses incurred otherwise. The details furnished therein do not seem to be very reliable. It seems to be an attempt made in right earnest to get the exact details, but it is doubtful that the person who had prepared this statement had succeeded. The statement Ex.PW36/A starts with the remark "this data is almost 1520 years old and it is very difficult to prepare the exact details but still we are trying to give as much as possible". I , therefore, find unable to persuade myself to take away from the total salary components which has been shown as other expenses. Since the prosecution itself had submitted the details of the salary as per Ex.P37 and the same had not been disputed. I would, therefore, rather go with the said statement originally submitted. As per this statement the total income received during this period towards salary was Rs.3,00,997/. If I add up all, the figure comes to Rs.3,26077/ and not Rs.3,21,903/ as stated in the details of income given in the charge sheet. I am of the view that the income from salary of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad be taken to be Rs.3,26,077/ instead of Rs.3,21,903/.
C.C. No. 47/11 81 of 143 To sum up the amount under this head be taken as Rs.3,26,077/ instead of Rs.3,21,903/.
Income from sale of LIG Flat of Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad
121. As per the admitted document Ex.P29 on record Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad had sold the flat no.111, Sector16, Rohini for Rs.90,000/. Income from sale of gold - Rs.3,60,000/
122. As per the document Ex.PW1/A and PW1/B accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had sold gold worth Rs.1,16,043/ to M/s Khairati Ram Des Raj, and as per the document Ex.P71 he had sold gold woth Rs.2,44,492/ to M/s Prem Jwewlers. The said amounts come to Rs.3,60,535/. On this account, however, in the charge sheet the income has been shown to be Rs. 3,60,000/.
123. To sum up income from sale of gold of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad be taken to be Rs.3,60,535/ instead of Rs.3,60,000/ as given in the charge sheet.
C.C. No. 47/11 82 of 143 S.B. Account No.30855, Saraswati Vihar held by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
124. As per Ex.P59/C the income from interest in this account is Rs.1853/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.1006 with Union Bank of India, Rohini, Delhi held by Ms. Neelima Prasad.
125. As per Ex.PW39/C the income from interest in this account is Rs.180/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB A/c No.5774 with Indian Overseas Bank, Rohini, Delhi held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
126. As per Ex.PW6/A3 to A5 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 654/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
C.C. No. 47/11 83 of 143 PPF A/c No.547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, Delhi held by R.L. Prasad
127. As per Ex.PW31/2 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 53539/. As discussed above this amount includes the interest also of the precheck period of Rs.1717/ The is to be therefore deducted form this amount. It comes to Rs. Rs.51822/ The same accordingly is taken as the income on this count.
SB A/c No.TPA 933 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
128. As per Ex.PW30/6 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 1980.99. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.045199 with SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi held by S. R.L. Prasad.
129. As per Ex.PW31/4 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 3397.31. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
C.C. No. 47/11 84 of 143 SB Account No.TPS145 with SBI, Delhi University, New Delhi held by R.L. Prasad.
130. As per Ex.PW30/3 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 4261.14. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.23911 with PNB, Green Park, New Delhi held by R.L. Prasad.
131. As per Ex.PW27/4 the income from interest in this account is Rs. 3289/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.014922 with SBI, Saraswati Vihar, Delhi held by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
132. As per Ex.PW11/C and 11/D the income from interest in this account is Rs.4095.14. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
C.C. No. 47/11 85 of 143 SB Account No.6225 with OBC Rohini, Delhi held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
133. As per Ex.P11 the income from interest in this account is Rs.1076/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.6238 with OBC, Rohini, Delhi held by Smt. Janki Prasad
134. As per Ex.P11 the income from interest in this account is Rs.859/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
SB Account No.5546 with South Indian Bank Ltd., Rohini held by Jaswant K.L. Prasad
135. As per Ex.PW37/D and 37/C the income from interest in this account is Rs.448/. The same has not been disputed. Thus, this income has been correctly stated.
C.C. No. 47/11 86 of 143 Income from matured NSC produced on 27.1.1996 - Rs.14,105/
136. There are photocopies of three NSCs on record one of Rs.5,000/ and the other of Rs.1,000/ each. They were procured on 27.1.1986. Probably the originals of the same must have been submitted at the time of maturity in the year 1992. Some how these documents were not put to the accused persons for admission and also the prosecution has not examined any witness to prove the same. It is, however, not in doubt that the Investigating Officer did consider the said NSCs and the income arising there from and accordingly mentioned the same in the details of income. I have no reason to doubt the same. Having seen the photocopies of the NCSs in my opinion the income as given in the charge sheet on account as Rs.14,105/ ( amount received on maturity ) cannot be doubted.
GPF withdrawals - Rs.69,840/
137. I have seen the record and I find on record from the three sanction letters by which an amount of Rs.10,000/ Rs.10,000/ and Rs.49,840/ had been withdrawn. The same comes to Rs.69,840/. This figure has been correctly given in the details of income.
C.C. No. 47/11 87 of 143 Income of Smt. Janki Prasad from rent and her knitting business - Rs. 84,000/ + Rs.83300/.
138. The total income as per this charge sheet of Smt. Janki Prasad during the check period was Rs.1,67,300/ (Rs.84,000/ + Rs.83,300/). According to the defence, however, the total income on this account was Rs.2,30,058/.
139. I have gone through the entire record available and have not been able to find sufficient documents either to say that she had an income of Rs. 1,67,300/ as stated in the charge sheet or Rs.2,30,058/ as stated in the defence.
140. From the copies of the Income Tax Returns on record of Smt. Janki Prasad for the Assessment year 199596, 199697 and 199798 collectively Ex.P28, the total income comes to Rs.1,28,776/. Unfortunately the Investigating Officer could only be partly examined in this case, before he had passed away, who could have given some clarification as to how he had reached this figure. I had on my own also tried to call for the record of the Investigation to find out if there is any way to cross verify the said figure. I was, however, informed that the said investigation record was not traceable. In the absence of any record being produced from either side, I am C.C. No. 47/11 88 of 143 proceeding on the assumption that the figures given by the prosecution of Rs. 1,67,300/ in the charge sheet must be correct and based on some documents in possession of the Investigating Officer .I am, therefore, taking the said figure to be Rs.1,67,300/ as correct that is to say that she had income from her knitting business of Rs.84,000/ and rental income of Rs. 83,300/ during the check period. I am accordingly accepting the said figures to be correct.
Interest from deposits of post office Timarpur, Delhi - Account No. 970621 (in the name of Smt. Janki Prasad; Account No.3000143 (in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad) in the post office, Timarpur; Account No. 999830 (in the name of Smt. Janki Prasad) in post office, Timarpur.
141. The income from interest in the said accounts have been show to be Rs.6,549.10, Rs.60.95 and Rs.294.85/. I have seen the record. There is a detailed statement during the investigation provided by witness PW15 vide Ex.PW15/A. The same have not been disputed by the defence. I am accordingly taking the same to be correct.
Income on account of pension and gratuity of Sh. R.L. Prasad - Rs. 1,74,645/
142. As per the complaint on record, on the basis of which the present case C.C. No. 47/11 89 of 143 was registered, prior to joining of AIIMS on 15.11.1989, accused R.L. Prasad was employed with Engineers India Ltd. from May 1983 to 13 November 1989 as a store clerk. Still Prior to this he had worked under the Ministry of Defence for about ten years. There is also one admitted document on record Ex.P33 by which a payment of Rs.4,992/ as gratuity and Rs.44,867/ as PF had been paid to him in 1990. If I add up these figures it comes to Rs. 49,859/. I have not been able to find any document on record how the Investigating Officer had given the figure on 1,74,645/ and treated the said amount as an income. It was submitted on behalf of the accused that there had been documents supplied to the Investigating Officer with regard to his previous employment, but the Investigating Officer did not make the same as part of the record. As has already been stated above, the Investigating Officer had passed away before his statement could be concluded. Therefore, there had not been any opportunity to get his clarification on this aspect. The file relating to the investigation of this case was also reported to be not traceable. Like I have stated above, I assume that the figure given by him must be on the basis of some documents which were in his possession. I am assuming the said figure to be correct.
C.C. No. 47/11 90 of 143 Income of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad from tuitions
143. According to the defence the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad is a Science Graduate (B.Sc. Chemistry) and in order to augment his income he had been taking tuitions. A reference was made to his Income Tax Returns where such income had been shown.
144. I have seen the record in which I find there is reference to income from tuitions. They are :
Financial Year Source of Income Amount Document Exhibit 199697 Tuition 33,360/ P61/B and P61/C 199798 Tuition Rs.18,500/ P61/D 199899 Tuition Rs.50,600/ P 61/E
145. All these documents had been admitted by the defence. These documents are relied upon documents by the prosecution. The Income Tax Return for the Financial Year 199697 in which accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad is stated to have earned Rs.33,360/as tuition fee was submitted on 30.03.1999 which is almost after two years of having earned the income on the said account. It cannot be lost sight of that this return showing this C.C. No. 47/11 91 of 143 income for the Financial Year 199697 was submitted after the raid had been conducted on 5.3.1999. There is, therefore, a distinct possibility that this return was filed with a view to somehow show that accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had some income in the Financial Year 199697. The overall circumstances make it unbelievable. I am, therefore, not inclined to take it the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had any income from tuitions in the Financial Year 199697.
146. For the Financial Year 199798 there is only an undated computation available on record in which the income from tuitions has been shown to be Rs.18,500/. There is no Income Tax Return along with the said record. I am, however, not prepared to believe that the Investigating Officer would not have insisted for the copy of Income Tax Return to be submitted by the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. I also see no reason that why accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad would not have supplied the said Income Tax Return to the Investigating Officer. The only possibility appears to be that the Investigating Officer though had collected the said Income Tax Return but had not filed the same on record. For these lapses of the Investigating Officer, there is no reason to penalise the accused. I, therefore, presume that the Income Tax Return had been filed for the said year in time by the C.C. No. 47/11 92 of 143 accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. Therefore, there is no reason as such to disbelieve him that during this period he had the income of Rs.18,500/. The same, therefore, may be taken into account.
147. So far a the income from tuition for the Financial Year 199899 is concerned, it could have only been filed after the raid. The Investigating Officer has only filed the computation of income for the said Financial Year and not the Return. Like stated before, it cannot be believed that he did not have in his possession the Income Tax Return for the said year, if he had the computation of income for the said year. Moreover this is one of the relied upon document filed by him. Meaning thereby he did not entertain any doubt it. I also see one more point here Rs.50,600/ as the earning from tuitions would mean he had been earning about Rs.4216 ( approx) every month, which does not sound as an unreasonable claim. I have no reason, therefore, to deny that accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad did not have so much of income during the period 199899 from tuitions.
148. To sum up I am taking that Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had income from tuitions of Rs.18,500/ during the Financial Year 199798 and Rs.50,600/ during the Financial Year 199899.
C.C. No. 47/11 93 of 143 Cash gifts received by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad and his wife at the time of marriage.
149. The defence had examined witness DW1 Smt. Mamta and DW2 Smt. Rekha Nayyar, both sisters of Smt. Seema wife of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. It was deposed by these witnesses that at the time of marriage witness DW1 Smt. Mamta had given Rs.10,000/ as cash gift to her sister and Smt. Rekha Nayyar had given Rs.25,000/ as cash gift. I am of the view that the same cannot be treated as the income of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. I take it that since the money was given to the wife of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad, it was her property. Neither the income nor the assets of the wife of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L Prasad are in question in this case. Cash gift of Rs.1,21,000/ received at the time of marriage.
150. Witness DW3 Sh. Anil Kumar brother in law (wife's brother of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad) had been examined in defence to prove that at the time of Teeka ceremony, he had given a cash gift of Rs.1,21,000/ to accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad on 18.11.1996. The witness had explained that he had been working as electrician in Saudi Arabia for a long time, in order to show that his family had the money to give a cash gift of RS.
C.C. No. 47/11 94 of 143 1,21,000/ to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. He had in his testimony stated that this money was given for purchasing the furniture and other household articles, usually given at the time of the marriage. This fact has been corroborated by the cobrother of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad, Sh. Ashok Kumar Nayyar examined as DW11. While going through the list of the articles as mentioned in the Search cum Observation Memo, there are number of household articles such as sofa, T.V, Almirahs, Beds etc to have been given at the time of the marriage, the value of which had not been added because of the same having been received from the inlaws of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. I assume that there is a valid reason to say that Rs.1,21,000/ which had been given at the time of the marriage for making purchase of household articles had been utilized as such. Since those household articles have not been counted in the total of the assets found at the residence of the accused, in my opinion, no benefit of this amount of Rs.1,21,000/ can be given to the Accused. Loans taken by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad
151. It has been claimed that accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had taken a loan for building the house on the plot purchased by him from one of his C.C. No. 47/11 95 of 143 friends named Sh. Suraj Pahwa DW4 and a family friend Smt. Alka Sharma DW5. This loan had been given by way of cheques and drafts which had been repaid in very small amounts in cash after the check period till 2001 in the case of Sh. Suraj Pahwa and till 2011 in the case of Smt. Alka Sharma. The prosecution had not disputed this but refused to take it into account for the reason that it was just a ploy to hide the illgotten money of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad.
From Friend Suraj Pahawa
152. The witness DW4 Sh. Suraj Pahwa had deposed that accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad was his childhood friend. They were staying in the same colony and used to play together. In 199495 accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had approached him for friendly loan of Rs.10,000/ as he was building a house and for this purpose he had given him the said money by way of a cheque of Rs.10,000/ drawn on Allahabad Bank. The money was returned to him in very small instalments. Although it is not absolutely clear, but I find that in one of the accounts of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad with SBI at Saraswati Vihar, there is an entry of Rs.10,000/ having been made after the clearing of cheque on 7.2.1995. It could be that entry. I am C.C. No. 47/11 96 of 143 prepared to believe this witness on this account. The amount of Rs.10,000/ does not appear to be so huge that it could not have been given as a friendly loan. I also find nothing odd, if this amount had been returned by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad in smaller instalments also because it can happen in case of close relationships specially when the witness described accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad as his childhood friend and that they used to play together. I am, therefore, accepting that he had taken Rs.10,000/ loan by way of a cheque from this witness which was repaid after the check period meaning thereby that this amount was available with accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad to be spent and, therefore, can be treated as income in his hands.
From K.N. Kalia and Alka Sharma family friends
153. As per the testimony of other witness DW5 Smt. Alka Sharma her father who was a friend of the father of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had given a loan of Rs.1,38,000/ by way of four drafts to accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad for construction of his house. Before passing away in 1997 he had informed her about this loan and that accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad would return the said money to her. According to her she too had given a C.C. No. 47/11 97 of 143 loan of Rs.40,000/ in 1994 to accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad for the same purpose. Coming to the repayment, she had stated that this entire amount of money of Rs.1,38,000/ + Rs.40,000/ was paid back by accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad to her in very small amounts and he continued to repay the same till 2011. In reply to the allegations that it was a ploy to hide the illgotten money, Ld. Defence Counsel had submitted that in the year 199596 the accused could not have imagined that in 1999 his house is going to be raided and in preparation thereof in defence they should get into said transactions.
154. I have seen the said Statement of Account. It shows one entry of Rs. 40,000/ on 22/11/1994 and entries of Rs.30,000/, Rs.40,000/, Rs.38,000/ and Rs.30,000/ on different dates of 1995. Though it is not clear from the Statement of Account that from which account the said payments came but on corelating with the statement of Smt. Alka Sharma one may assume that the said payments had been received by accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad by way of the said cheques. The Investigating Officer also did not dispute the same. The only question he had in mind was that as against these payments there must have been some money paid back in cash otherwise there was no reason for them to have not demanded the return of money for so long.
C.C. No. 47/11 98 of 143 There is nothing on record as such to jump to the conclusion as to whether the said money had been paid back in cash against which the said cheques had been issued by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. This is some kind of inference drawn by the Investigating Officer considering the conduct of the accused persons of having not repaid the said amount.
155. It does sound unusual that the demands made to the extent of Rs. 1,78,000/ was not pressed to be returned and the repayments continued to be made in cash in 1415 years sometimes in the smaller amounts even like Rs.1500/ and Rs.2,000/. There is something definitely amiss here. In 199495 this amount was no small amount. Even if the family of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad enjoyed a very close relationship with the family of witness DW5 Smt. Alka Sharma but still they would not have waited for the said money to be returned for 1415 years. More than that if they were in close relationship, the family of accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad would have been eager to return the money at the earliest. I find that in the year 1996 vide Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW1/B and P71 accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had sold gold for Rs.3,60,535/. It is inexplicable that if so much of money he had borrowed from DW5 Smt. Alka Sharma and her father, why he did not proceed to repay the said loan after having sold the gold for such an C.C. No. 47/11 99 of 143 amount. The defence is not required to prove its defence beyond reasonable doubt, but still it should be able to prove its case at least on preponderance of probabilities. If this defence is weighed on preponderance of probabilities, then what has been stated by the Investigating Officer appears to be correct. I am, therefore, not inclined to treat this loan of Rs.1,78,000/ as part of the income. Loan taken by Sh. R.L. Prasad from his relative Chauthey Lal
156. The defence had examined witness DW13 Sh. Chauthey Lal to prove that he had given a loan of Rs.1,20,000/ to accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. He had deposed that he was in the business of dry cleaning clothes at his residence. Sh. R.L. Prasad was the uncle (Moussa) of his wife. This loan was given by him in five instalments. Sh. R.L. Prasad did not inform him as to why he wanted this loan, but sine he had asked him for the loan and considering that he was a close relation of his wife, he had given him the money without questioning him. This money was given by him to Sh. R.L. Prasad in cash, but it was returned to him by Sh. R.L. Prasad by way of four cheques of Rs.50,000/ on 13.2.2004, Rs.30,000/ on 30.1.2009 and two cheques of Rs. 20,000/ each. He had placed on record photocopy of his C.C. No. 47/11 100 of 143 Savings Passbook of Indian Overseas Bank and Punjab National Bank to say that the said money had been deposited in his account. This fact had also been proved separately by examining the bank officials of State Bank of India, Ansari Nagar Branch (DW17) where accused Sh. R.L. Prasad was maintaining his account and from PNB (DW20) where Sh. Chotte Lal was maintaining his account and of Indian Overseas Bank, Model Town Branch where also witness Sh. Chotte Lal was maintaining his account. Thus, there is no doubt that above four cheques had been issued by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad in favour of Sh. Chotte Lal amounting to Rs.1,20,000/. All these payments came after the check period.
157. There is no record of the said money having been given as loan to accused Sh. R.L. Prasad except for the statement given by Sh. Chotte Lal in Court. There is no way to cross verify this fact. I am of the view that it was expected from the defence that if it wanted to establish this theory of taking loans from close relatives, then it should have also disclosed the purpose for which the loan had been taken so that it could have become easier to at least cross verify if this loan had actually been taken or not relating the assets referred to in the case. The testimony of the witness DW13 Sh. Chotte Lal is silent about it. In fact he says that it was not disclosed to him that as to why C.C. No. 47/11 101 of 143 the said loan was being taken. In the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C also there is no such reference that as to why such a loan was taken. In the absence of any other material been placed on record on the basis of which it could be in some way crossverified that such a loan had been taken, just on the basis of the testimony of this witness I am not prepared to accept that any such loan had been taken. There is one more reason I am not prepared to believe it. I find on record a FDR of Rs.70,000/ Ex.P4 dated 5.9.98. This loan was stated to have been taken in 9798. If he had actually taken the loan in 199798, I am of the view that his first priority would have been to repay the loan to a close relative than to deposit the surplus money in the form of FDR.
158. On the basis of the record produced, testimony of the witness, it appear to be highly improbable that such a loan had been taken by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad from Sh. Chauthey Lal. Accordingly, I conclude that this cannot be treated as an income in the hands of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. Loan of Rs.2 lacs from one Bhagat Singh Dabas
159. The defence had examined witness DW15 Sh. Ajay Kumar who had deposed that his father had good relations with accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. He C.C. No. 47/11 102 of 143 also knew accused Sh. R.L. Prasad personally since his childhood. Depending on the need his father and the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad used to borrow money from each other. In 199798 Sh. R L Prasad had borrowed a sum of Rs.2 lacs from his father. Accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had returned Rs. 1,25,000/ by way of two separate cheques in the name of his younger brother Deepak in 2009, when his father was seriously ill. A day prior to the death of his father, accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had given him Rs.25,000/ in cash. After his father had passed away, the remaining amount of Rs.50,000/ had been paid by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad to him by way of a cheque. He had brought along with him a Statement of his Account at the Corporation Bank showing the entries of Rs.50,000/. The fact of issuance of cheque by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad of Rs.one lac in favour of Sh. Deepak was established by the examination of the witness DW21, an official from SBI, Ansari Nagar, Delhi and the document I.e Statement of Account produced Ex.DW21/A3. Similarly the payment by way of cheque of Rs.25,000/ to Sh. Deepak had been proved by the examination of the witness DW18 from Central Bank of India, Rohini, Delhi Copy of cheque Ex.DW18/A. Similarly, payment of Rs.50,000/ by cheque to this witness was established by examination of the witness DW21 from Corporation Bank, Nangloi by Statement of Account Ex.DW21/A3. It may be noted that all the entries are of C.C. No. 47/11 103 of 143 the year 200910. Like in the case of the loan being claimed to have been received from Sh. Chauthey Lal by accused Sh. R.L. Prasad, in this case also it the purpose for loan has not been disclosed. I am sure that this loan of Rs.2 lac must have been taken for some purpose. This loan was stated to have been taken in cash. It is difficult for me to understand if this witness was keen on returning the money by way of cheques, why did he take the money in cash.
160. I find no material whatsoever on the basis of which the claim of the defence and the statement of the witness DW13 could be independently verified, so as to believe his testimony that his father had given a loan of Rs.2 lacs to the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad. There is another factor which makes it improbable, like it has been stated above in September 1998 accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had made a fixed deposit of Rs.70,000/ Ex.P4 in a bank and if he had so much of money which he could put in fixed deposit where was the necessity for him to borrow the money from others. In my opinion, it is, therefore, not believable that the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had borrowed Rs. 2 lacs from Sh. Dabas. I am accordingly, not prepared to accept it as an income in the hands of accused Sh. R.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 104 of 143 Income from Agricultural Land
161. It is stated in the submissions made before the Court by the defence that in the Annual Property Return the accused had made reference to his owning agricultural land. According to defence the details thereof had been provided to the Investigating Officer but he did not take into account the same. I have seen the said Annual Statements of Account Ex.P17 and I find that in the Annual Property Return it is shown that the agricultural land in possession of the accused is just one Bigha and from it the income which has been shown is 'NIL'. If the income which has been given in the Property Return by the accused is 'NIL', then as to how he is claiming now that he had some income from this agricultural land.
Income from withdrawal from PPF Account No. 547 with SBI Ansari Nagar.
162. On examining the PPF Account No.547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar Ex.PW31/2, I find that there had been a withdrawal of Rs.19,000/ made from this account in February, 1998. Although the withdrawals from the Provident Fund Account of the accused had been shown as the income in the hands of the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad, but this amount has not been shown as an C.C. No. 47/11 105 of 143 income in his hand. I am of the view that once this withdrawal had been made from this account, it was money available in his hand to be spent. Therefore, it is to be treated like an income in his hand. It accordingly be added as an income.
Recovery of Rs.31,000/ from the office drawer of Sh. R.L. Prasad
163. It is stated in the defence that there was a recovery of Rs.31,000/ made from the office drawer of the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad and this money was not of the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad but of AIIMS received in his official capacity as the Stores Officer for the purchase of livery items. In the charge sheet there is a reference of recovery of cash of Rs.6,63,065/ from the residence and the locker of the accused. The same has already been explained above. The discussion as to the recovery of the said money would show that it does not include Rs.31,000/.
To sum up this amount of RS.31,000/ has not been shown as an asset anywhere in the charge sheet. Thus, there is no requirement of it being deducted from the assets.
C.C. No. 47/11 106 of 143 Income of Smt. Janki Prasad The property received in the form of jewellery and cash by Smt. Janki Prasad as per the WILL of her grandfather.
164. It is stated that Smt. Janki Prasad had some regular income from the property she had received from her grandfather including cash and jewellery as per his WILL. The WILL placed on record is of 15.07.1987. It is not clear as to when the grandfather of Smt. Janki Prasad had passed away. As per the WILL she was to receive half of the cash, movable and immovable properties left behind by her grandfather. According to the accused pursuant to the said WILL she had received Rs.50,000/ in cash and some jewellery which she had sold off to one Kanhaiya Lal for Rs.58,000/ in 1992. It may noted here that there is nothing stated with regard to the fact as to whether Rs.50,000/ if at all received, was received before the check period or after the check period. According to the statement given by her under Section 313 Cr.P.C her father was employed as a foreman with M/s Burn & Co. at Calcutta. Her mother had passed away at the time of her birth. She had received all the jewellery of her mother at the time of her marriage. It is stated by the defence that unfortunately Smt. Janki Prasad had passed away after her statement had been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Sh. Kanhaiya Lal to whom she had sold the gold in 1992, was also reported to C.C. No. 47/11 107 of 143 have passed away on the summons sent to him. Therefore, the fact of the said gold being sold could not be brought on record. It is, however, submitted that despite all these limitations in the light of the testimony of the witness DW14 Sh. Subh Narayan Mishra who had proved the execution of the WILL Ex.DW14/A it can still be believed that she must have received some money and gold from her grandfather in terms of the said WILL. Though there is nothing to cross verify what has been argued by the defence, but at least there is an averment that gold received as per WILL had been sold during the check period which is missing for the claim of cash received as the WILL. I am prepared to believe she had sold this Gold for Rs.50,000/ as the figure given by the accused do not appear to be so high which cannot be accepted as believable.
165. I would also like to add that Smt. Janki Prasad is no more. The proceedings against her already stand abated. The sole purpose of finding out about her income and assets is that in the charge sheet her income and assets have been clubbed with the other accused persons and this will have consequences for the other accused persons as well. Meaning thereby they would suffer the consequences of the Late Accused Janki Prasad failing to prove the said fact. Considering that what has been stated overall is C.C. No. 47/11 108 of 143 believable and that as a result of failure to prove this fact on account of the factors not in the control of the other accused persons and to avoid that the other accused person may not have to face the adverse effects of it, I am accepting Rs. Rs. 50000/ as income in the hands of the accused Smt. Janki Prasad on account of having sold the gold received by her as per WILL of her grandfather to Sh. Kanhiya Lal in the year 1992.
Income on account of allowance received by Sh. R.L. Prasad from MEA for official foreign trip of Rs.23855/.
166. This figure has been given in the written submissions submitted by Ld. Defence Counsel. I have, however, not been able to find any document on record to prove that this allowance was received by Sh. R.L. Prasad from MEA. The same, therefore cannot be counted as income of Sh. R.L. Prasad. Probablising of income before the check period.
167. It was submitted by the Ld. Defence Counsel that the Investigating Officer was under an obligation to probabilize the income of the accused persons prior to the check period and thereafter giving benefit thereof to the accused. The entire submissions made by him reads as under C.C. No. 47/11 109 of 143 "The check period which has been taken by the I.O is from 1.1.91 to 5.3.99. It may be noted that the accused Sh. R. L. Prasad had been in Govt. Service since 1972. He had served in Defence from 1972 to 1984. In 1984 he had joined Engineers India Ltd. and continued to work there till 14.11.89 and thereafter had joined AIIMS as Assistant Stores Officer. That is to say that by 1.1.91 the accused ha already put in service of about 19 years. All the previous details of the employment had been provided to the I.O including the documents, but he has not made those documents as part of the record. One can find out that at Sr. No. 11 of the Income at page no. 2 there is an amount of Rs. 1,74,645/ has been shown as the amount towards pension and gratuity of Sh. R. L. Prasad. One may presume that this figure must have been arrived on the basis of some document, but the I.O has purposefully not filed any document of the previous service record from 1972 onward, though, has made reference to income from pension and gratuity and also admitted this fact in the complaint submitted to the Superintendent of Police, CBI for the registration of the case that prior to joining AIIMS on 25.11.89, he had been working from May 1983 to 13.11.89 as Store Clerk and prior to that he had been worked under Ministry of Defence for about ten years. It was for the I.O to have probalized the income which the accused had prior to the check period and given benefit thereof to the accused. In fairness the I.O should have produced all these records because they have bearing on the outcome of this case."
168. It was submitted by the Ld. Defence Counsel that at the beginning of the check period accused Sh. R. L. Prasad had a cash balance of Rs.
C.C. No. 47/11 110 of 143 38,500/ in his account and accused Sh. Jaswant K. L. Prasad had a cash balance of Rs. 26,000/ in his account.
169. There is no way to verify the above claims of the defence because neither the defence nor the prosecution has placed on record any such document. It was laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Pallonji Darabshaw Daruwalla AIR 1988 SC 88 "The choice of the period must necessarily be determined by the allegations of fact on which the prosecution is founded and rests. However, the period must be such as to enable a true and comprehensive picture of the known sources of income and the pecuniary resources and property in possession of by the publicservant either by himself or through any other person on his behalf, which are alleged to be so disproportionate. In the facts and circumstances of a case, a ten year period cannot be said to be incapable of yielding such a true and comprehensive picture. The assets spilling over from the anterior period, if their existence is probalized, would, of course, have to be given creditto on the income side and would go to reduce the extent and the quantum of the disproportion."
170. In short according to the above judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court though the full service period of the public servant need not be taken C.C. No. 47/11 111 of 143 as the check period and it could be a shorter period. The care should, however, be taken that due credit is given to the public servant of the savings he had on the date of the commencement of the check period.
171. It was, therefore, the duty of the Investigating Officer to have taken into account all the savings which the accused had at the beginning of the check period. It could be easily accomplished by having checked the balances available with the accused persons in their bank accounts or as fixed deposits. It may be noted that the accused Sh. R. L. Prasad was already in government service of about 19 years, before the check period, as per the complainant Ex P 14, first having worked with Ministry of Defence Defence for about 11 years and than in Engineers India Ltd. for about six and half years years from May 1983 to 13/11/89 as stores clerk before joining the AIIMS in 1989 as Assistant Stores Officer in the pay scale 16402900. it is, therefore, unlikely that he would have had no savings in his hand at the beginning of the check period. At this point of time it would be difficult to speculate as to how much savings Sh. R. L. Prasad must be having at that point of time. But if I have to make a conservative estimate taking that during the period of his service at Ministry of Defence he had received salary on an average at Rs.600/ per month, during the period he had worked with C.C. No. 47/11 112 of 143 Engineers India Ltd he had received on an average salary of Rs.1500/ and as per the record I.e Ex PW21/1 he received Rs. 41623 as salary during his tenure at AIIMS. If I add up all it would come to Rs. 247823/ ( approximately). It would be not be too of the mark if I assume that during this period I.e just before the check period he could have had saving of around one third of the same, which would come to Rs.82600/ It the Ld. Defence Counsel submits that it he had a balance of Rs. 38,500/ in his account, I am of the view same can be accepted. As far as the balance in the account of Sh. Jaswant K. L. Prasad is concerned, the same seems to be unlikely for the simple reason that in 1991 he must have been of 20 years of age. During the course of the arguments it was also submitted that he is a science graduate. In all probability, therefore, he must have been in college at that time. In the absence of any reference to any source of his income, it does not appear to me that it will be appropriate to consider this amount as the savings in the hands of Sh. Jaswant K. L. Prasad before the check period.
One may accordingly add Rs. 38,500/ as the income in the form of savings in the hands of Sh. R. L. Prasad at the time of check period. I am also adding here Rs. 38,817/ also as part of the probalized income at the C.C. No. 47/11 113 of 143 beginning of the check period as the balance avaialble in the PPF account at the beginning of the check period was Rs. 13,817/ (reference to para No.
112.) III EXPENDITURE Expenditure on the education of Sh. Rahul Prasad in Vidya Bharti School, Rohini - Rs. 22,765/
172. As per Ex. PW10/A a letter given by the Principal of Vidya Bharti School, Rohini, Delhi to the Investigating Officer of the case alongwith statement of fees paid Ex. PW10/B, Rs. 22,765/ had been incurred on the education of Sh. Rahul Prasad by Shri R.L. Prasad. The same has not been disputed.
To sum up Rs. 22,765/ has been correctly included in the expenditure. Education of Sh. Rahul Prasad at Remal Public School, Rohini, Delhi - Rs. 8750/.
173. As per the Ex. P58, a letter of the Principal of Remal Public School, Rohini, addressed to the Investigating Officer while studying at Remal Public C.C. No. 47/11 114 of 143 School for the education of Sh. Rahul Prasad in total a sum of Rs. 8,750/ had been paid.
To sum up Rs. 8,750/ has been correctly included in the expenditure. Rent of Locker No. 6225, Punjab National Bank, Green Park Extn. New Delhi and Account No. 6225 of Oriental Bank of Commerce - Rs. 2500/.
174. I have seen the statement of account of Punjab National Bank, Green Park Extension - Account No. 23911 Ex. PW27/4. I find that as per this statement during the check period the total amount paid as rent for locker was Rs. 950/ ( Rs. 350 on 12.08.1998 + Rs. 600 on 16.01.1999).
175. I have been able to locate one more statement of account Ex. P11 of Account No. 6225 of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Rohini in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad which also shows locker rent having been paid on 03.09.1998 of Rs. 250/.
176. Thus the total amount which one could find from the record having been made incurred towards the locker rent comes to Rs. 1200/.
C.C. No. 47/11 115 of 143
177. To sum up towards the rent of lockers in the name of Sh. R.L. Prasad and Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad the amount to be included as expenditure would be Rs. 1200/ and not Rs. 2500/ as stated in the charge sheet. Stamp Paper purchased by Sh. R.L. Prasad for preparation of Sale Deed of Property No. C171, Shadra City Colony, Loni, Ghaziabad - Rs. 3,190/
178. As per the document Ex. P44 the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad had purchased one property at C171, Sharda City Colony, Loni, Ghaziabad from Seedeshwari Builders (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. It appears that this property was purchased before the check period. In the said letter there is no reference to as to how much of stamp duty was paid for the purchase of the said property. In the letter there is a reference to copy of the sale deed having been supplied to the Investigating Officer but it seems that the Investigating Officer did not file the same on record. Had it be on record it would have been possible to say that how much of expenses were incurred on purchase of stamp duty. In the absence of any such record, in my view the said amount has not been established by the prosecution as having been incurred by Sh. R.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 116 of 143 To sum up the said amount of Rs. 3,190 be subtracted from the calculation of the total expenditure.
Purchase of cylinders, DPR from Priyanka Gas Agency , Rohini - Rs. 950/.
179. The document Ex. P38 would show that this Gas connection was transferred from Priyanka Gas Agency, Timarpur to Rohini. This connection was with Sh. R.L. Prasad even prior to the check period. There is a reference to deposit of Rs. 950/ having been made for the purchase of 2 cylinders and one DPR. It is not clear that that as to when this payment had been made. There is also no receipt etc filed alongwith it. Therefore, there is a doubt that if this payment had been made during the check period. In a situation like this I an not inclined to include this expenditure having been incurred during the check period.
To sum up this amount is subtracted from the total expenditure. Insurance on Policy of Maruti Car No. UP5F4315 from 18.11.1997 to 17.11.1997 and 18.11.1998 to 17.11.1999 in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad- Rs. 6529/.
C.C. No. 47/11 117 of 143
180. As per the document Ex P39, Ex. PW7/A1 to Ex. PW7/A4 and Ex. P42 Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had paid insurance of Rs. 6,529/ for the period 18.11.1997 to 17.11.1998 and Rs. 6,756/ for the period 18.11.1998 to 17.11.1999. In the details of the expenditure, however, only the amount of Rs. 6,529/ has been included. I am of the view that since the document Ex. P41 is an admitted document relating to the payment made of insurance policy for the period 18.11.1998 to 17.11.1999 the said amount can be added in the total of the expenditure.
To sum up besides the amount of Rs. 6,529/ already mentioned towards the payment of insurance policy of the said car an amount of Rs. 6,576/ be also added in the total of the expenditure. Refill of gas cylinder from Rohit Gas Agency, Rohini - Rs. 696
181. As per document Ex. P41 during the check period an amount of Rs. 696/ had been incurred towards refilling of gas cylinders. Since the Investigating Officer has created a separate amount for house hold expenses under which he has taken 33% of the income of salary of Sh. R.L. Prasad towards the house hold expenses, in my opinion refilling of gas cylinders C.C. No. 47/11 118 of 143 would fall in the category of house hold expenses and, therefore, should not be treated separately from the house hold expenditure referred to in the list.
To sum up this amount, however, should be deducted from the total expenditure.
Policy premium of Bajaj Classic Scooter from 04.07.1997 to 03.07.1998 - Rs. 405/.
182. As per document Ex. P42 Sh. R.L. Prasad had paid policy premium for Bajaj Classic Scooter for the period 04.07.1997 to 03.07.1998 of Rs. 405/ and also paid the same amount towards the policy premium of the said scooter for the period 07.07.1998 to 06.07.1999. It is an admitted document. In the details of the expenditure, however, only an amount of Rs. 405/ has been included paid as premium from the period 04.07.1997 to 03.07.1998. In my opinion the amount of Rs. 405/ for the priod 07.07.1998 to 06.07.1999 be also included as an expenditure.
To sum up an amount of Rs. 405/ be added in the expenditure.
C.C. No. 47/11 119 of 143 Security money of cylinder LPG to Puneet Gass Services, Rohini - 900/
183. As per document Ex. P69 security of Rs. 900/ had been deposited with Puneet Gas Services by Sh. R.L. Prasad. It is an admitted document.
To sum up this amount has been correctly included in the details of the expenditure.
Monthwise gas refill charges from Puneet Gas Services, Rohini from 12.11.1998 to 12.02.1999 - Rs. 560/.
184. As per the details given in the above Ex. i.e. Ex. P69 the letter from Puneet Gas Services during the period 12.11.1998 to 12.02.1999 an amount of Rs. 560/ had been incurred towards the refill charges. In my opinion since there is a separate head of household expenses made wherein 33% of the income from salary has been treated as an expenditure, this amount in my view relates to hold hold expenses and, therefore, should not be separately counted.
To sum up this amount be deducted from the total expenditure.
C.C. No. 47/11 120 of 143 Stamp paper purchased by Sh. R.L. Prasad on 30.06.1998 for preparation of Sale Deed while purchasing plot at Faridabad - Rs. 34,875/
185. As per Ex P53 total amount of Rs. 34875/ had been paid as stamp duty, which is an admitted document. This amount has been correctly put as an expenditure.
LIC Policy premium of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad on Policy No. 111652864
- Rs. 47,766/.
186. As per the document Ex. P13, an admitted document, Sh Jaswant K.L. Prasad had paid a premium of Rs. 47,766/. This amount has been correctly included in the total expenditure.
Colour T.V. Panasonic purchased from Sreeriram Electrovision Pvt. Ld. by Sh. R.L. Prasad Rs. 9500.
187. There is a receipt which was recovered from the house of the accused dated 10.01.1999 for the purchase of Panasonic Colour T.V. It is not an admitted document. I find that in the search cum observation memo Ex. P56 no such T.V. was found at the residence of the accused on the summons C.C. No. 47/11 121 of 143 sent to Sreeram Electrovision Pvt. Ltd. for proving the said receipt but it was reported that no such shop is in existence at the given address. . In the given circumstances in my opinion the prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt if Sh. R.L. Prasad had purchased the said Panasonic T.V. from Sreeram Electrovision Pvt. Ltd.
To sum up this amount, therefore, should be deducted from the total expenditure.
Kitchen stand purchased from Kitchen Plaza, Wazipur - Rs. 920/
188. From the list of search cum observation memo Ex. P56 , I do not find any such item having been found at the residence of the accused though there are number of kitchen items mentioned in the list. There is a receipt on the record Ex. PW12/A according to which one steel kitchen stand had been purchased for Rs 920/. Though witness PW12 Sh. Pankaj Dhingra the owner of the Kitchen Plaza had identified the said receipt but understandably not in a position to say who had purchased it. There is no mentioned on the list. I find no other witness having been examined to prove that this receipt was recovered from the residence of the accused. In the over all C.C. No. 47/11 122 of 143 circumstances in my view the prosecution has failed to establish that the Kitchen stand had been purchased by Sh. R.L. Prasad for Rs. 920/.
To sum up this amount be deducted from the total expenditure. Videocon Washing machine purchased from Hindustan Traders, Green Park, New Delhi. Rs. 7500/.
189. One would find that the Washing Machine has also been shown as the part of the household articles found at the residence of the accused. There is a separate head under the assets with regard to the house hold articles found at his residence during the raid. The value of which is given to be Rs. 105400/. This value includes the value of the Washing Machine also, given to be Rs. 7000/. Since the Washing Machine has been included in the assets, it cannot be separately added under the list of expenditure. Therefore, this amount of Rs. 7000/ should be deducted from the total value of expenditure.
House tax paid on Flat No. D10/14, Rohini, Delhi from 03.04.1991 to 18.09.1998 - Rs. 18,943/.
190. As per the letter Ex P18 of the House Tax Department in respect of C.C. No. 47/11 123 of 143 above property on behalf of Smt. Janki Prasad house tax of Rs. 18,943/ had been paid. It is an admitted document. It can be said to have been correctly added in the total expenditure.
House hold expenditure 33/% of income from salary - Rs. 1,76,730.31
191. This amount has been mentioned not based on any particular logic. But there is no serious challenge made as to the assessment from the side of the defence. I am, therefore, taking the said amount as having been correctly added in the expenditure on account of house hold expenses during the cheque period.
To sum up this account has been correctly added in the expenditure. Telephone charges on phone No. 7295625
192. As per the document Ex. P31 and Ex. PW17/1 to 17/5, Sh. R.L. Prasad had paid an amount of Rs. 18,954.40 towards the telephone charges during the period from 10.08.1995 to 31.03.1999. The case of the defence, however, is that the accused had been getting the reimbursement of the C.C. No. 47/11 124 of 143 telephone bills. There was one witness Sh. B.S. Chauhan (Assistant Engineer) from AIIMS had been examined as DW7. This witness had proved one memo dated 21.04.1998 Ex. DW7/A according to which Sh. R.L. Prasad was entitled to reimbursement of telephone bill w.e.f. 02.12.1997. Meaning thereby if there is any amount to be squared of on account of payment of telephone bills then it can only be from 02.12.1997 to March, 1999. I have calculated the same on the basis of the details given by the MTNL i.e. from December, 1997 to March, 1999. The said figure comes to Rs. 7,083/. While retaining the figure of Rs. 18,954.40 on the expenditure side I am including the figure of Rs 7083/ on the income side as income on account of reimbursement of telephone of bills.
193. To sum up the figure of Rs. 18,954.40 be retained as part of the expenditure but at the same time an amount of Rs. 7083/ be added as income on account of reimbursement of telephone bills to the tune of Rs., 7,083/.
Expenses on booking of Indica Car by Sh. R.L. Prasad - Rs. 10,758/
194. There is one letter Ex.P32 on record with regard to Rs. 10,758/ having been paid by Sh. R.L. Prasad for the booking of any Indica Car. It is an C.C. No. 47/11 125 of 143 admitted document. This amount has been correctly added as an expenditure.
Purchase of LIG Flat No. 111, Pocket H5, Sector16, Rohini from Sh. Nayan Singh on 17.12.1993 in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad - Rs. 85000/.
195. There is one photocopy of GPA and receipt Ex. P30 available on record showing that Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had purchased the above property for Rs. 85,000/. It is an admitted document. It has been correctly added as an expenditure.
Installments paid towards purchase of SFS flat in the name of Jaswant KL Prasad, in Sector23, Pocket6, Category II, FF Rohini, Delhi on 13.09.1996 - Rs. 2,47,500/
196. In the file Ex. P68 of DDA relating to the allotment of above flat there is one application submitted with DDA which indicates that at the time of applying for the said plot there was a demand draft of Rs. 50,000/ submitted. There is no dispute about that. There is another challan on the record of the file showing a deposit of Rs. 1,97,500/ on 01.05.1997 towards the payment of installments after the said plot had been allotted to Sh. Jaswant K.L. C.C. No. 47/11 126 of 143 Prasad vide the allotment letter dated 20.02.1997. The case of the defence, however, is that after this allotment had been made, this allotment itself was sold of by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad to one DW 16 Sh. Gulshan Rai Khullar on a premium of Rs. 1,00,000/. After the said "allotment letter" had been sold off , it was Sh. Gulshan Rai who had deposited the installment of Rs. 1,97,500/ to DDA. Thus there are two components of the defence, one, that by selling the said "allotment letter" Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had earned Rs. One lac, which should go as his income and another that the payment of installment of Rs. 1,97,500/ has been wrongly attributed to him because this payment was made by. Gulshan Rai.
197. DW16 Sh. Gulshan Rai Khullar had deposed on the same lines. According to him Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad was known to him as he used to visit his shop at Bhagirath Palace where he was running his business of selling surgical items. According to him he had paid Rs. 1,97,500/ after getting a pay order made from his own account at Punjab National Bank, Gurudawara Road, New Delhi. The challan which was submitted for the deposit of the said installment was filled in by his employee who had scribbled the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad on the challan. According to him this allotment was ultimately cancelled because of the nonpayment of C.C. No. 47/11 127 of 143 other installments. In order to make this Court believed that the allotment had been transferred to him by selling the "allotment letter", he had pointed out a letter Ex. DW16/B dated 25.09.1997 on the file of DDA to have been written in his hand for seeking clarification with regard to payments of installments on which he had obtained the signatures of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad as by that time the allotment was in the name of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad only.
198. There is no way to independently verify that Rs. 1,50,000/ had been paid by Sh. Khuller including the amount of Rs. 50,000/ paid at the time of submitting the application for the allotment of the said flat but still from what he had deposed in the Court it did appear that at least the amount of Rs. 1,97,500/ had been paid from his account, the witness can be believed. If one assumes the scenario that there had been no such transfer, as the prosecution would like, it at least it can be said since this money had gone from the account of this witness, which can be treated like a loan in the hands of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. It is a matter of record that after the cancellation had been made, though the orders had been passed for refund, but this refund was not collected by any one. Since there is a reasonable probably of Rs. 1,97,500/ having gone from the account of this witness, this amount can C.C. No. 47/11 128 of 143 be deducted from the expenditure on this account. In other words, out of the amount of Rs. 2,47,500/, Rs. 50,000/ deposited at the time of the submission of the application can only be attributed to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
To sum up the amount of Rs. 1,97,500/ be deduced from this expenditure.
Amounts spent by Sh. R.L. Prasad on the marriage of his daughter - Rs. 59,840/
199. I find on record a document Ex. PW2/A1 related to sanctioning of loan of Rs. 49,840/ from P.F. Account to Sh. R.L. Prasad. It seems that the Investigating Officer had noted this figure after making an addition of Rs. 10,000/ in the loan amount received by Sh. R.L. Prasad from his account.
The figure arrived at, in my view can be believed. I am accordingly accepting the same as the expenditure incurred on the marriage of his daughter.
C.C. No. 47/11 129 of 143 Payment made to M/s Umang Leasing & Credit Company Ltd. of Rs. 16,518/ towards purchase of LML Scooter No. AL 8SK 8098 by Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad - Rs. 16,518/.
200. There is a document on record of Umang Leasing & Credit Company Ltd. Ex. P48, which is an admitted document, as per this document Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had paid Rs. 16,518/, towards the security, insurance and installments paid of the loan he had taken for the purchase of the above LML Scooter from 15.11.1998 to 05.03.1998. It is an admitted document.
To sum up it can be said that this amount has been correctly stated as the expenditure on the part of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad. Expenditure on maintenance of Maruti Car No. UP15F 4315 of Rs. 3,367.16 and Rs. 5,745.15/.
201. There are three receipts on record Ex. P64, P65 and P49. These are admitted documents. They show a payment of Rs.99112/ having been made towards the maintenance of the said car. it has been correctly added as the expenditure of Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
C.C. No. 47/11 130 of 143 Premium paid to National Insurance Company, Noida in respect of Maruti Car UP 15F 4315 - Rs. 7,175/.
202. I have not been able to find any document on record having been filed or proved that the said amount of Rs. 7,175/ had been paid towards the insurance of the car UP 15F 4315.
This amount is to be deducted from the total expenditure. Amount paid for registration of Maruti Car No. UP15F 4315 - Rs. 350/
203. This amount is reflected in the document Ex. P47 which is a copy of a receipt for the booking of the said car. It has also been concluded above that this car was given as a gift to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad at the time of his marriage. Once the said conclusion has been reached this amount also cannot be attributed to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad.
204. This entry, therefore, may be retained here and a corresponding entry of Rs. 350/ be made as a gift having been made to Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad at the time of his marriage towards the purchase of the car.
C.C. No. 47/11 131 of 143
205. In view of the forgoing discussion and the facts established I am redrawing the list of Incomes, Assets and Expenditures, as follows:
IV CALCULATION OF DISPROPORTIONATE ASSETS INCOME S. No. Details of Income Amount (Rs.)
1. Income from salary of R.L. Prasad 5,35,547
2. Income from salary of Jaswant K.L. Prasad 3,26,077
3. Income from Sale of LIG Flat No.111, Sector16, Rohini of Smt. 90,000 Janki Prasad
4. Income from sale of gold of Jaswant K.L. Prasad 3,60,535
5. Interest received from deposit in bank as given below :
(i) SB A/c No.30855, SBI, Saraswati Vihar - Jaswant KL Prasad 1,853
(ii) SB A/c No.1006 with UBI, Rohini - Neelima Prasad 180
(iii) SB A/c No.5774 Indian Overseas Bank,Rohini -JKL Prasad 654
(iv) PPF A/ No.547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar - R.L. Prasad 51,822
(v) SB A/c TPA 933, SBI Ansari Nagar - Jaswant KL Prasad 1,980.99
(vi) SB A/c 45199, SBI, Ansari Nagar - R. L. Prasad 3,397.31
(vii) SB A/c TPS145 SBI, Delhi University - R.L. Prasad 4,261.14
(viii) SB A/c 23911 PNB Green Park - R.L. Prasad 3,289 C.C. No. 47/11 132 of 143
(ix) SB A/c 14922, SBI, Saraswati Vihar - R.L. Prasad 4,095.14
(x) SB A/c 6225, OBC, Rohini - Jaswant K.L. Prasad 1,076 (xi) SB A/c 6238 OBC Rohini - Janki Prasad 859
(xii) SB A/c 5546 South Indian Bank, Rohini - J KL Prasad 448
6. Income from sale of matured NSC purchased on 27.1.86 - R.L. 14,105 Prasad
7. GPF Withdrawal - R.L. Prasad 69,840
8. Income of Janki Prasad from knitting business 84,000
9. Interest from deposits in Post Office, Timarpur:
(i) A/c No.970621 Janki Prasad 6,549.10
(ii) A/c No.3000143 - R.L. Prasad 60.95
(iii) A/c No.999830 - Janki Prasad 294.85
10. Pension and Gratuity of R.L. Prasad 1,74,645
11. Income from Rent - Janki Prasad 83,300
12. Income from reimbursement of telephone expenses - R.L. 7,083
Prasad
13. Income from sale of Flat No.D10/14, Rohini to Sh. Charan Singh 7,50,000
- Janki Prasad
15. Income from tutions - Jaswant K.L. Prasad 69,100
16. Income by Loan taken from DW12 repaid after the check period - 10,000 Jaswant K.L. Prasad
17. Amount on account of purchase of Maruti Car UP 15F 4315, paid 2,14,764 by in laws - Jaswant K.L. Prasad
18. Income on account of cash and jewellery received as per will of 50,000 her grandfather - Janki Prasad
19. Amount on account of Registration of Maruti Car UP15F4315 350 paid by in laws - Jaswant K. L. Prasad C.C. No. 47/11 133 of 143
20. Income from withdrawal from PPF Account - R. L. Prasad 19,000
21. Income before the check period - R. L. Prasad 52,317 Total 29,91,481 ASSETS S. No. Details of Assets Amount (Rs.)
1. D1/139, Sector 16, Rohini - R. L. Prasad 4,24,325
2. D1/140, Sector16, Rohini - Jaswant K. L. Prasad 4,43,300
3. 500 Sq. Yard Plot at Faridabad R. L. Prasad 2,25,000
4. 85 Sq. yard plot at Mukandpur R. L. Prasad 17,000
5. 170 Sq. yard plot at Mukandpur R. L. Prasad 34,000
6. Plot no.C1/190, Sector 16, Rohini - Janki Prasad 30,000
7. 100 Sq. Yard plot in New Jagriti Enclave Sehkari Awas Samiti, 36,200 Ghaziabad, U.P R. L. Prasad
8. Maruti Car No. UP 15F 4315 - Jaswant K. L. Prasad 2,14,764
9. Bajaj Classic Scooter no.DL 8SE 4625 R. L. Prasad 24,527
10. House hold articles 1,05,800
11. Recovery of Cash 8,065
12. NSC No.087354, Sub Post Office, Timarpur - R.L. Prasad 10,000
13. NSC No.907090, Sub Post Office, Timarpur R.L. Prasad 10,000
14. NSC No.748576 Sub Post Office, Timarpur - JKL Prasad 5,000
15. Three KVPs of Rs.1,000/ each, Sub Post Office, Timarpur in the Nil name of Neelima Prasad R. L. Prasad
16. KVP dated 2.5.95 Sub Post Office, Timarpur in the name of 5,000 C.C. No. 47/11 134 of 143 Neelima Prasad R. L. Prasad
17. STDR SBI, Delhi University - joint name of R.L. Prasad and 25,336 Janki Prasad
18. STDR dated 5.9.98 - R.L. Prasad 70,000
19. Deposit Receipt dated 19.7.97 OBC, Rohini - JKL Prasad 2,500
20. FD receipt No.7198 dated 11.1.98 - R.L. Prasad Nil
21. Bank Balance in SB A/c No.TPS/145 SBI, Ansari Nagar R.L. 51,496 Prasad
22. Bank balance in S B A/c No.01190045199 with SBI, Ansari 9,098 Nagar - R.L. Prasad
23. Bank Balance in SB A/c no.01190014922, SBI, Saraswati Vihar Nil
- R.L. Prasad
24. Bank Balance in SB A/c No.TPS933 SBI, DU, Delhi - JKL Nil Prasad
25. Bank balance in SB A/c No.5546 with South Indian Bank Ltd. 3,300 R.L. Prasad
26. Bank balance in SB A/c No.1006 with UBI, Rohini - Neelima 333 Prasad
27. Bank balance in SB A/c No.23911 with PNB, Green Park - R.L. 17,081 Prasad
28. Bank Balance in PPF A/c No.547 with SBI, Ansari Nagar - R.L. 45,092 Prasad
29. Bank Balance in SB A/c No.6225, OBC, Rohini - JKL Prasad 32,478
30. Bank balance in SB A/c No.6238 OBC - Janki Prasad 18,369
31. Bank Balance in SB A/c No.5774 Indian Overseas Bank, CRPF 5,307 Ext. Counter, Rohini - JKL Prasad
32. Deposit in A/c No.970719 Post Office, Timarpur - Janki Prasad 50,000 C.C. No. 47/11 135 of 143
33. Deposit in A/c No.970621 Post Office, Timarpur - Janki Prasad 50,000
34. Deposit in A/c No.970685 post office, Timarpur - R.L. Prasad 50,000
35. Deposit in A/c No.3000143 post office, Timarpur - R.L. Prasad 954 Total 20,24,325 EXPENDITURE S. No. Details of Expenditure Amount (Rs.)
1. Expenditure on education of Rahul Prasad in Vidya Bharti 22,765 School, Rohini - R.L .Prasad
2. Education of Rahul Prasad from Remal Public School, Rohini - 8,750 R.L. Prasad
3. Rent of locker No.6225 - R.L. Prasad 1,200
4. Stamp Paper purchased for preparation of sale deed of property Nil No.C17, Sharda City Colony - R.L. Prasad
5. Purchase of Cylinder from Priyanka Gas Agency, Rohini - R.L. Nil Prasad
6. Insurance on policy of Maruti Car - Jaswant K.L. Prasad 13,105
7. Refill of gas cylinder from Rohit Gas Agency, Rohini Nil
8. Policy premium of Bajaj Classic Scooter - R.L. Prasad 405
9. Security money of LPG Cylinder to Puneet Gas Services, Rohini 900
- R.L. Prasad
10. Monthwise Gas Refill charges from Puneet Gas Service, Nil Rohini R. L. Prasad
11. Stamp paper purchase for preparation of sale deed for plot at 34,875 Faridabad - R.L. Prasad
12. LIC policy premium - Jaswant K.L. Prasad 47,766 C.C. No. 47/11 136 of 143
13. Colour TV, Panasonic purchased from Shree Ram Electrovision Nil (P) Ltd. R. L. Prasad
14. Kitchen stand purchase from Kitchen Plaza, Wazirpur - R.L. Nil Prasad
15. Videocon Washing Machine purchased from Hindustan Traders, Nil Green Park - R.L. Prasad
16. House Tax paid of Flat No.D10/14 - Janki Prasad 18,943
17. House hold expenditure 33% of income from salary - R.L. 1,76,730.31 Prasad
18. Telephone charges of Phone no. 7295625 - R.L. Prasad 18,954
19. Booking expenses on purchase of Indica Car - R.L. Prasad 10,758
20. Purchase of LIG Flat No.111, Pocket H5, Sector 16, Rohini - 85,000 Jaswant K.L. Prasad
21. Installment paid towards purchase of SFS Flat - Jaswant K.L. 50,000 Prasad
22. Amount spend on marriage of daughter - R.L. Prasad 59,840
23. Amount repaid to M/s Umang Leasing and Credit Co. Ltd. 16,518 Towards purchase of LML Scooter - R.L. Prasad
24. Expenditure on maintenance of Maruti Car - Jaswant K.L. 3,367 Prasad
25. Expenditure on maintenance of Maruti Car - Jaswant K.L. 5,745 Prasad
26. Premium paid to National Insurance Co., Noida in respect of Nil Maruti Car - Jaswant K.L. Prasad
27. Amount paid towards registratio nof Maruti Car UP15F4315 350 Jaswant K. L. Prasad
28. Amount paid to DDA for Flat no. D10/14, Rohini Janki Prasad 3,39,040 Total 9,14,917 C.C. No. 47/11 137 of 143 Calculation of Assets (Disproportionate) Income : 29,91,481 Assets : 20,24,325 Expenditure : 9,14,917 Disproportionate assets = Assets - (Income Expenditure) = 20,24,325 (29,91,481 9,14,917) = 20,24,325 20,76,564 = 52,422 V. OTHER ISSUES Effect of nonexamination of Investigating Officer
206. It may be noted that in " Disproportionate Assets" cases, investigating officer is the most important witness. It is he who not only collects the evidence but also makes lots of approximations/ estimations as to the income of a public servant and also it is his duty to call for explanations and justifications as to the assets found in the possession of the Public Servant and also the expenditures incurred by him and to also crosscheck such explanations and justifications. He is also supposed to make inquires about the background of the public servant like his life style and host of all other C.C. No. 47/11 138 of 143 facts. His nonexamination may or may not prove to be fatal for the case but certainly is a factor which cannot be overlooked because it deprives the defence to an opportunity to putforth his defence effectively.
207. In this case the Investigating Officer passed away before his examinationinchief could be concluded. I wanted some clarifications on certain aspects of the investigation conducted even investigation file of the case was reported to be not traceable. I am not pushing this aspect any further as I finds on the plain facts, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case.
Sanction of prosecution under section 19 of the Act not proved
208. It is strange neither in the course of trial this issue was raised by the prosecution nor by the Defence. At the time when this case was instituted in Court the Accused was still in service and there had been sanction sought for his prosecution and granted by Dr P.K Dave. He was not even cited as the witness in this case. Sanction order was also not listed in the list of documents. In any case this issue has neither been raised by either side and I have already reached my conclusion as to whether the accused persons can be said to have been found in possession of "Disproportionate Assets"?
C.C. No. 47/11 139 of 143 The issue of sanction or no sanction has now become meaning less. Standard of Living
209. In the cases of "disproportionate assets" cases it is of utmost importance that the investigating officer makes an effort to judge the standard of living of the Govt. servant to understand if he is living beyond his means. Like he may find whether what kind cloths he and his family members wear, what kind watches he wears, what kind whiskey or wine he consumes, sometimes even noting what is in his kitchen also gives an idea about his standard of living. The investigating Officer, is expected to take photographs of the place of raid or even a video to capture all these aspects. The investigating officer seems to have done no analysis during investigation on these aspects.
210. After having gone through the list of items found at the residence of the accused I find nothing extraordinary in the list which may give an impression that he was into buying expensive articles. Even the gifts received at the time of the marriage of the accused Sh. Jaswant K. L. Prasad do not appear to be expensive. The standard of living which I can make out from the list can only be said to be modest.
C.C. No. 47/11 140 of 143 Pattern of investment acquiring immovable properties and investment in fixed deposits Properties undervalued not proved.
211. The overall pattern of investment made by the accused Sh. R. L. Prasad would show that he had been investing the savings in more secured assets and not making investments of speculative nature like investing in stocks. His assets can be found either in the form of Fixed Deposits or purchasing properties. One can find that almost every year he had been purchasing a property. It also appears that he had been picking up the size and value of the property which perhaps he could afford as none of them appear to be a high valued property . Properties range from Rs. 17000 to Rs. 2.25 Lacs. It may further be noted the property of Rs.2.25 Lacs had been purchased after he had substantial salary jump from pay scale Rs.16402900 to pay scale of Rs.8000Rs13000 . In the original complaint filed, on the basis of which the present case was registered, it was suggested that the properties acquired were undervalued. The prosecution has not examined even a single witness to buttress this claim. In fact the value of all such assets have been taken at their face value in the list of assets. Thus number of properties he held by itself cannot be held against him.
C.C. No. 47/11 141 of 143 Conclusions:
212. In view of the above discussion, I conclude that the prosecution has failed to prove that accused Shr. R.L. Prasad was in possession of assets disproportionate to the known sources of his income and also that the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad had abetted accused Sh. R.L. Prasad in acquiring the assets disproportionate to the known sources of his income. I am accordingly, acquitting the accused Sh. R.L. Prasad of committing the offence under section 13(1)(e) punishable under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as charged. I am also acquitting the accused Sh. Jaswant K.L. Prasad for having committed the offence under section 109 IPC read with Section 13(1)(3) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as charged.
213. The bail bonds furnished under section 437A Cr.P.C shall remain in force for a period of six months subject to any orders which may be passed by the appellate court in case of any appeal being preferred against this judgment.
C.C. No. 47/11 142 of 143
214. Assets seized, be released to the accused persons, after the expiry of period of appeal or subject to any orders which may be passed by the appellate court in case of any appeal being preferred against this judgment.
File be consigned to Record room.
Announced in the Open Court ( L. K. GAUR )
on 29 of November, 2014
th
Special Judge (CBI)9
Central District, Delhi.
C.C. No. 47/11 143 of 143