Delhi District Court
Cc No.04/13 Cbi vs . Harmohan Dayal 1 Of 4 on 27 April, 2015
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE, CBI (PC ACT)-06, CENTRAL
DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CC No.04/13
Unique I.D. No.024001R0041322013
RC No.1(A)/CBI/ACU-V/New Delhi.
CBI
vs.
Harmohan Dayal.
ORDER
Final report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. in this case was filed on 23/11/2012, whereby no accused has been charge sheeted. It is prayed that the closure report filed by the I.O. be accepted. CBI had registered FIR in a case RC 1(A)/87-ACU(V) against Shri Prem Kumar, IAS (since deceased) on 27.03.1987 u/s 5 (2) r/w 5(1) (e) of PC Act, 1947. Searches were conducted on 01/04/1987. It was alleged that to create a false defence regarding the disproportionate income, family members of Shri Prem Kumar filed ante dated income tax and wealth tax returns under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme which was in effect till 31.03.1987. These returns were filed after the last date of submission by allegedly interpolating few entries with the help of income tax officials.
RC 1/89-ACU(V) was registered on 23.03.1989 u/s 120B, 420, 468, 471, 477-A IPC and section 5(2) r/w 5(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 against ITO Sh. H.M. Dayal (A-1), process server Sh. Murari Lal (A-2), Sh. Prem Kumar (A-3), Sh. Sujit Gulati (A-4) s/o Sh. Prem Kumar, Sh. Rajpal Narang (A-5), Smt. Raj Rani (A-6) w/o Sh. Prem Kumar, Sh. Sapan Gulati (A-7) s/o Sh. Prem Kumar, Smt. Niharika Gulati (A-8) daughter in law of Sh. Prem Kumar.
CC No.04/13 CBI Vs. Harmohan Dayal 1 of 4 Ld. PP for the CBI submits that after completion of investigation, returns filed were not established to be forged and no sufficient evidence has emerged on record against the proposed accused persons. However, the returns were submitted without bank challans and even beyond the last date of receipt and were accepted and processed by income tax officials.
It is submitted that, after IO submitted report, legal opinion was sought by CBI from senior legal officers, who opined that "findings of income tax authorities being quasi judicial in nature will be binding on CBI and if Income Tax Authorities come to a finding that the returns filed are genuine then no further action would be possible" and thereafter, investigation of this case was recommended to be kept in abeyance till the trial of the connected case No.RC-1(A)/87-ACU(V) was over as the present case stood on a weaker footing.
Ld. PP submits that CBI sent SP's report to Income Tax Authorities for initiating departmental action Shri Murari Lal and against other IT officials namely Sh. H.M. Dayal, ITO, Sh. O.P. Choudhary, ITO and Shri A.C. Varshney, Inspector for helping accused Prem Kumar in filing ante dated income tax returns. It is submitted that Shri Prem Kumar, only accused of RC No.1/87 expired in April, 2005 and trial in the said case stood abated. After his death, it was recommended to file closure report in this matter, as there was no sufficient evidence prosecution of family members of Shri Prem Kumar at belated stage would serve no fruitful purpose. The updated status of Departmental Action initiated by the IT Authorities on the recommendation of CBI was ascertained and an updated status as to whether the Income Tax Department has processed the ante dated IT Returns filed by the family members of Sh. Prem Kumar.
CC No.04/13 CBI Vs. Harmohan Dayal 2 of 4 On asking, why there was extraordinary delay in filing the closure report, Ld. PP for the CBI submitted that the reason for delay in filing report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. in the court is that it was decided by the CBI to keep the matter in abeyance till the finalization of the trial of DA case against accused Prem Kumar because this case was outcome/connected with the said DA Case. It is further submitted that proceedings against Sh. Prem Kumar in DA case has been abated by the Court as he had died in April, 2005 and no progress was seen between December, 1991 till 2005 and thereafter, CBI made several efforts to obtain the details from Income Tax Authorities, however, records were reportedly not traceable. On the recommendations of CBI, Income Tax department had taken departmental action against erring Income Tax Officials namely Sh. Murari Lal and Sh. H.M. Dayal. In this regard I.O. Sh. Suresh Iyer had submitted his report dated 22.03.2013 & 11.07.2013 in Court.
Ld. PP for CBI submitted that with regard to departmental action, it was informed by Income Tax Authorities that Murari Lal LDC had been imposed penalty of withdrawal of pension of an amount of Rs.200/- per month for a period of two years. Shri HM Dayal was imposed a minor penalty i.e. censure by the department. It is pointed out that during this process of updating status, the then concerned Holding IO left the CBI by taking VRS in 2010 due to which the matter further lingered on and the case was again processed and finally the orders of filing of closure report were received on 05.10.2012. It is submitted that in between, updates were taken from Income Tax Authorities regarding the departmental action conducted by them against the accused IT officials and a show cause notice containing recommendations of departmental such action against Shri Sujit Gulati, was sent.
CC No.04/13 CBI Vs. Harmohan Dayal 3 of 4 I have perused the charge sheet, documents enclosed with the charge sheet and report dated 21.08.2014 of Sh. Pradeep Kumar, S.P. Concerned, CBI. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances noted above, closure report u/s 173 Cr.P.C., filed by the CBI in this case is accepted. CBI shall return the documents/articles seized during investigation in this case, to the concerned persons at the earliest.
File be consigned to the record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT VINAY KUMAR KHANNA
on 27th April, 2015 Special Judge-CBI (PC Act)-06
THC/Delhi.
CC No.04/13 CBI Vs. Harmohan Dayal 4 of 4