Delhi District Court
The Judgment Of The Supreme Court In U. ... vs U. Srinivas on 23 September, 2019
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER BHAT
SPECIAL JUDGE, PC ACT, CBI-15, ROUSE AVENUE
COURTS, NEW DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF:
CBI No. : 193/2019
CNR No. : DLCT11-000810-2019
FIR No. : RCAC2/2002/A0001/CBI/ACU-II/N.Delhi
U/s 120B/109/193 r/w Section 13 (2) and
13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act,
1988
STATE
THROUGH
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
NEW DELHI
VERSUS
1. Vijay Kumar Puri,
S/o Late Sh. Inder Sain Puri,
Commissioner of Customs & Central
Excise, Cochin,
R/o House No. 5, Chillavanur Road,
Ambadi Retreat, Cochin. ...........Accused No. 1
2. Smt. Amita Puri,
W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Puri,
R/o House No. 5, Chillavanur Road,
Ambadi Retreat, Cochin. ...........Accused No. 2
3. Sh. Vinesh Vyas,
S/o Sh. Dharni Dhar Vyas,
R/o A-68, MIG Colony, Indore (MP).
...........Accused No. 3
(Since discharged by the Hon'ble High Court
vide order dt. 22.01.2010 passed in Crl. W.P.
No. 550/07)
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 1 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
Date of Institution : 30.01.2004
Date of judgement reserved on : 16.09.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgement : 23.09.2019
J U D G M E N T :-
1. In this case, the CBI had chargesheeted the above named accused Vijay Kumar Puri, his wife Amita Puri and Sh. Vinesh Vyas for the offences U/s 120B, 109 ad 193 IPC r/w Section 13 (2) and 13 (1)
(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. It is alleged in the chargesheet that accused Vijay Kumar Puri amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income by Rs. 1,30,70,863.61 (Rupees One Crore Thirty Lacs Seventy Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Three and Sixty One Paise) during the period 01.06.1988 to 22.02.2002. It is further alleged that his wife Smt. Amita Puri actively abetted him in commission of the offence by executing several documents in various banks and other financial institutions. With regard to Vinesh Vyas, it has been alleged that he conspired with Vijay Kumar Puri as well Amita Puri and prepared/fabricated 86 false bills showing purported sale of Gold Jewellery/Silver Utensils by Amita Puri to his firm Shree Ambika Jeweller, Indore in order to enable them to explain their ill gotten wealth.
2. The FIR is stated to have been registered on 20.02.2002 on the basis of a source information wherein it was stated that Sh. Vijay Kumar Puri, a 1976 Batch Officer of Indian Customs and Excise Service, amassed a large number of movable and immovable assets CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 2 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. which were disproportionate to his known sources of income during the period November 1976 to 31.03.1999 while working in different capacities at different places in Central Excise and Custom Department through illegal means or otherwise by abusing his official position as a Public Servant. It was further mentioned in the FIR that he had acquired these assets in his own name and in the name of his dependent family members i.e. his wife Amita Puri and his two daughters Neha Puri and Divya Puri.
3. According to CBI, it was revealed during the investigation that there had been an extraordinary spurt/rise in the accumulation of assets by Sh. Vijay Kumar Puri since 01.06.1988 after his posting at Indore as Deputy Collector/Additional Commissioner of Central Excise. Therefore, the said date i.e. 01.06.1988 was taken as a date for the start of check period, whereas the date of search i.e. 22.02.2002 has been taken as the date of end of check period.
4. During this period, the accused Vijay Kumar Puri has served in different capacities at different places as under:-
Period of Posting Post Held June 1988 to June 1992 Deputy Collector Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, inter-alia In-charge of Anti-Evasion & Intelligence, Indore July 1992 to June 1994 Additional Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Mumbai June 1994 to June 1995 Additional Commissioner of Customs, Rummaging & Intelligence, Customs' Preventive Commissionerate, Mumbai June 1995 to June 1998 Special Departmental Representative, CEGAT June 1998 to May 2001 Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune, inter-alia, In-charge of Anti-Evasion, Mumbai CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 3 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. May, 2001 to June 2002 Commissioner of Customs, Lucknow June 2002 - till date Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Cochin
5. The Assets (both movable as well as immovable) owned by Vijay Kumar Puri and his family at the start of the check period i.e. 01.06.1988, the assets found in his name and in the name of his family members at the end of check period, his income during the check period and his total expenditure during the said period have been mentioned in the chargesheet as follows:-
A. Assets at the start of period of check (as on 01.06.1988):-
A1 Immovable Assets:-
1. Payment towards Plot No. 189, Central
Excise Cooperative Housing Society, Bangalore Rs. 35,000/-
2. Booking amount of SFS Flat No. 184, Pocket A, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. Rs. 30,927.50/-
Total Rs.65,927.50
A2 Movable Assets :-
1. Refrigerator Rs. 4,654/-
2. Stereo Rs. 4,368/-
3. Hi-Fi System Rs. 1,700/-
4. TV Rs. 7,615/-
5. Car (Padmini) Rs. 79,498/-
6. Two FDRs with Canara Bank, Gol Market, Delhi Rs. 16,610.70
Rs. 1,14,445.70
Total Assets (A1+A2) at the start of the check period : Rs. 1,80,373.20 B. Assets at the end of check period:-
B1 Movable Assets : 1. Deposits in various bank accounts : Rs. 80,45,982.56 2. Investments/deposits with private companies : Rs. 32,90,316.00 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 4 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 3. Bonds of ICICI : Rs. 2,20,000.00 4. Bonds of SHCIL : Rs. 5,75,000.00 5. Units held with UTI : Rs. 60,000.00 6. Bonds of IDBI : Rs. 95,000.00 7. Kisan Vikas Patras : Rs. 2,00,000.00 8. MIS Deposits with Post Office : Rs. 1,92,000.00 9. Car-Premier Padmini : Rs. 79,498.00 10. Scooter - Kinetic : Rs. 35,827.00 11. Computer : Rs. 43,250.00 12. Air Conditioner : Rs. 23,730.00 13. Washing Machine : Rs. 10,350.00 14. Colour TV : Rs. 16,270.00 15. Other House Hold Articles : Rs. 6,17,277.00 Total : Rs.1,35,04,500.56 B2 Immovable Assets : 1. Plot and House at 29/4 Circular Road, Dehradun : Rs. 9,83,350/- 2. SFS Flat No. 184, Pocket A, Sarita Vihar, N.Delhi : Rs. 8,99,851/- 3. Plot in Khasra No. 1/3, Near Airport, Indore : Rs. 1,04,000/- 4. Plot No. 189, Central Excise Group Coo. Society : Rs. 93,625/- Total : Rs.20,80,826/- Total Assets (B1+B2) as on 22.02.2002 : Rs. 1,55,85,326.56 C. Income during the check period:- 1. Income from salary : Rs. 11,65,255.00 2. Income from interest as reflected in returns : Rs. 2,64,181.89 3. Income of wife from salary : Rs. 48,617.80 4. Income of wife from other sources : Rs. 17,94,348.50 5. House Building Advance : Rs. 2,22,500.00 6. GPF Advance : Rs. 1,64,400.00 7. Rent from Dehradun House : Rs. 3,86,598.00 8. Rent from Delhi Flat : Rs. 54,000.00 9. LIC Maturity Claim : Rs. 37,157.00 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 5 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 10. Sale of articles : Rs. 6,500.00 11. Gifts received from relatives etc. : Rs. 98,000.00 Total : Rs. 42,41,557.75 Income during the period of check : Rs. 42,41,557.75 D. Expenditure during the check period:- 1. General/Kitchen expenditure : Rs. 3,88,418/- 2. LIC Premium : Rs. 2,54,197/- 3. Income Tax paid by Mrs. Amita Puri : Rs. 3,32,200/- 4. Income Tax paid by V.K. Puri : Rs. 1,38,420/- 5. Other expenditure of Amita Puri as per IT Returns : Rs. 49,715/- 6. Other expenditure of V.K. Puri as per IT Returns : Rs. 1,58,101/- 7. Water Tax : Rs. 60,507/- 8. House Tax : Rs. 11,250/- 9. Memberships of various clubs : Rs. 84,311.50 10. Education of daughters : Rs. 2,13,311/- 11. Foreign visits etc : Rs. 1,48,621/- 12. Interest paid on bank loans : Rs. 47,701/- 13. Locker Charges : Rs. 4,700/- 14. Mobile Phone : Rs. 16,016.32 Total : Rs. 19,07,468.82 Total Expenditure during the period of Check : Rs. 19,07,468.82
6. The assets worth Rs. 1,30,70,863.61 stated to have been amassed by accused Vijay Kumar Puri during the period 01.06.1988 to 22.02.2002 which are disproportionate to his known sources of income has been calculated in the following manner:-
• Assets at the end of check period Rs. 1,55,85,326.56 • Less assets before the check period (-) Rs. 1,80,373.20 • Total assets accumulated during the check period Rs. 1,54,04,953.36 • Expenditure during the check period (+) Rs. 19,07,468.82 • Assets and expenditure during the check period Rs. 1,73,12,421.36 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 6 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. • Income during the check period (-) Rs. 42,41,557.75 • Disproportionate assets Rs. 1,30,70,863.61
7. It would be apposite to reproduce here the details of investments stated to be made by accused V.K. Puri in his name or in the name of his family members during the check period in various banks as mentioned in the chargesheet. The same are as here under:-
S. Name of the Account No. Principal Name of Remarks No. Bank Amount as on the Holder 22.02.2002 1 HDFC Bank FD-0054470063873 50,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen Ltd., B. Desai Road, Mumbai 2 -do- FD-0054470063856 50,000/- Amita Puri Frozen (Wife) 3 -do- SB-0051000001019 31,481/- V.K. Puri Frozen 4 HDFC Bank FD-0074470062418 45,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen Ltd., Netrali Apptts., Pune 5 -do- FD-0074470062408 45,000/- Amita Puri Frozen (Wife) 6 -do- SB-0071000061063 1,32,141.09 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 7 HDFC Bank FD-0034470033902 42,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen Ltd., KG Marg, New Delhi 8 HDFC Bank FD-1044680017034 48,000/- Amita Puri Frozen Ltd., SS Road, (Wife) Pune 9 -do- FD-1044680017027 48,000/- Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri & Amita Puri 10 -do- FD-1044470019368 48,000/- Neha Puri Frozen (Daughter) & V.K. Puri 11 Standard FD-22530235230 43,000/- Amita/ Vijay Closed Chartered Kumar Puri Bank, MG Road, Mumbai 12 -do- FD-22530235249 43,000/- -do- Closed CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 7 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 13 Union Bank of SB-6583 2,366.69 V.K. Puri Frozen India LD Ruparel Marg, Mumbai 14 -do- SB-6581 9,378.73 Amita Puri Frozen (Wife) 15 -do- SB-6663 3,134.74 Neha Puri Frozen (Daughter) 16 -do- SB-6664 28,768 Divya Puri Frozen (Daughter) 17 -do- PPF-429 4,06,175/- V.K. Puri Frozen 18 -do- PPF-444 3,35,999/- Neha Puri Frozen (Daughter) 19 -do- PPF-445 3,35,790/- Divya Puri Frozen (Daughter) 20 -do- PPF-446 5,11,987 Amita Puri Frozen (Wife) 21 -do- FD-DRC-11304 42,000/- Amita Puri Frozen (Wife) 22 -do- FD-DRC-11305 42,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen 23 Union Bank of SB-16730 18,190.63 Amita Puri Frozen India, Napean (Wife) Sea Road, Mumbai 24 -do- DRC-14216 40,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen (195632) 25 -do- DRC-14217 40,000/- Amita Puri Frozen (195633) (Wife) 26 UTI Bank Ltd., SB- 1,22,506/- Vijay Kumar Frozen Bund Garden 073010100036847 Puri Rd Branch, Pune 27 -do- TD-7641 75,000/- Vijay Frozen Kumar/ Divya Puri 28 -do- TD-7658 80,000/- Amita Puri/ Frozen V.K. Puri 29 -do- TD-7672 75,000/- V.K. Puri/ Frozen Amita Puri 30 -do- TD-7689 75,000/- V.K. Puri/ Frozen Neha Puri 31 -do- TD-7696 80,000/- Amita Puri/ Frozen V.K. Puri 32 State Bank of SB-226/34214 0 Vijay Kumar Account CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 8 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. India, Tilak SB-011900026586 Puri Closed Road, Pune 33 State Bank of SB-011900026585 0 Amita Puri -do-
India, Tilak Road Branch, Pune 34 Bank of FD-5072-0010- 45,000/- V.K. Puri/ Frozen Maharashtra, 000006 Amita Puri CE & C Extn.
Counter, Pune
35 -do- FD-5072-0010- 50,000/- Amita/V.K. Frozen
000034 Puri
36 -do- FD-5072-0010- 45,000/- Neha Puri & Frozen
000007 V.K. Puri
37 -do- FD-5072-0010- 50,000/- Amita Puri/ Frozen
000009 V.K. Puri
38 -do- SB-2 86,374.82 V.K. Puri Frozen
39 -do- FD-5072-0010- 45,000/- Divya/ V.K. Frozen
000026 Puri
40 -do- SB-3 5,089.18 Amita Puri Frozen
41 -do- SB-4 8,844.62 Neha Puri Frozen
42 -do- SB-5 25,056.05 Divya Puri Frozen
43 State Bank of SB-35982 0 V.K. Puri Closed
India, Indore
44 -do- SB-40168 679.99 Amita Puri Frozen
45 Bank of India, SB-33454 90,519.53 V.K. Puri Frozen
Ballard Estate,
Mumbai
46 Canara Bank, SB-6706 1,758.22 V.K. Puri/ Frozen
Gole Market, Amita Puri
Delhi
47 -do- FD-1818/2001 42,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen
48 Central Bank of SB-30804 0 Amita Puri Account
India, Closed
Parliament
Street, Delhi
49 -do- SB-32577 10,069/- V.K./ Amita Frozen
Puri
50 -do- SB-36059 103 Amita/V.K. Frozen
Puri
51 -do- TD-46201 50,000/- Amita Puri Frozen
52 -do- TD-46236 23,000/- Neha Puri Frozen
53 Central Bank of FD nos. 53/297 40,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 9 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
India, Ashley
Hall Branch,
Dehradun
54 -do- FD-53/298 40,000/- Frozen
55 Punjab SB-64921 94,193.5 V.K. Puri Frozen
National Bank,
Paltan Bazaar,
Dehradun
56 -do- MBFD-10160 40,000/- Amita Puri Frozen
57 -do- MBFD-12830 50,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen
58 -do- SB-67140 1,973 Amita Puri/ Frozen
V.K. Puri
59 State Bank of SB-01190028701 47,183.58 Amita Puri Frozen
India, Bund
Garden Road,
Pune
60 -do- STDR-01292031140 42,000/- Neha Puri Frozen
61 -do- STDR-01292031141 42,000/- Amita Puri Frozen
62 -do- STDR-01292031142 42,000/- Vijay Kumar Frozen
Puri
63 PNB Nari Shilp MBFD-3915 40,000/- -do- Frozen
Mandir Branch,
Dehradun
64 -do- MBFD-3006 50,000/- Amita Puri Frozen
65 -do- SB-6306 24,362/- Amita Puri/ Frozen
V.K. Puri
66 Bank of SB-984 859.6 Amita Puri Frozen
Maharashtra,
Dehradun
67 -do- SB-1328 14,408.5 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Puri
68 -do- CDR-344814 25,000/- -do- Frozen
69 -do- CDR-577922 30,000/- -do- Frozen
70 -do- CDR-577920 48,000/- Neha Puri/ Frozen
V.K. Puri
71 -do- CDR-344823 12,100/- Amita Puri Frozen
72 -do- CDR-344813 20,000/- Frozen
73 Punjab MBFD-7223/11 50,000/- Vijay Kumar Frozen
Nartional Bank, Puri
Clock Tower
Branch,
Dehradun
74 Indian SB-15337 28,470.2 Vijay Kumar Frozen
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 10 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
Overseas Puri / Amita
Bank, Tagore Puri
Villa, Dehradun
75 -do- FD-510102091 40,000/- Vijay Kumar Frozen
Puri
76 -do- FD-510090840 50,000/- Amita Puri Frozen
Account operated after
77 ICICI Bank SB-000401001900 50,863/- V.K. Puri/ search. However
Ltd., Nariman Amita Puri account frozen
subsequently with a
Point, Mumbai balance of Rs. 1.13
Lakhs approx.
78 -do- FD-000415235454 35,000/- V.K. Puri Closed
79 -do- FD-000415235455 35,000/- -do- -do-
80 -do- FD-000415016002 45,000/- -do- -do-
81 IDBI Bank Ltd., SB-0131057241099 Vijay Kumar Closed
Pune Puri
82 -do- FD-0117057241000 48,000/- -do- Closed
83 -do- FD-0115657312700 42,000/- Neha Puri -do-
84 -do- FD-0117057241100 48,000/- Amita Puri -do-
85 UTI Bank Ltd., FD- 50,000/- V.K. Puri/ Closed
Bombay main 004010400705621 Neha Puri
branch, Fort,
Mumbai
86 -do- FD- 42,000/- V.K. Puri, Closed
004010400984263 Amita Puri
87 -do- FD- 42,000/- -do- Closed
004010400984270
88 UTI Bank Ltd., FD- 48,000/- -do- Frozen
Jangli Maharaj 03701040001216
Road Branch,
Pune
89 -do- FD- 48,000/- Neha Puri/ -do-
03701040001224 V.K. Puri
90 -do- FD- 48,000/- V.K. Puri/ -do-
03701040001208 Amita Puri
91 Central Bank of TDR-104554 40,000/- V.K. Puri Frozen
India,
Parliament
Street Branch,
New Delhi
92 -do- TDR-104562 40,000/- Amita Puri -do-
93 ICICI Bank FDR-533788 48,000/- Amita Puri Closed
Ltd., Bundh
Garden Road,
Pune
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 11 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
94 -do- FDR-533782 48,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
95 ICICI Bank FDR-003915000308 48,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Ltd., Shivaji
Nagar, Pune.
96 -do- FDR-003915000309 48,000/- Amita Puri -do-
97 Global Trust FDR No. 40,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Bank Ltd. 2201518666
Fergusson
College Road,
Pune
98 -do- FDR No. 40,000/- Amita Puri -do-
2201518667
99 -do- FDR No. 40,000/- Neha Puri -do-
2201518665
100 Global Trust FDR No. 40,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Bank Ltd., MG 22005113386
Road, Pune.
101 -do- FDR No. 40,000/- Amita Puri -do-
22005113387
102 -do- FDR No. 40,000/- Neha Puri -do-
22005113388
103 IndusInd Bank TDR No. 504340002 42,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Ltd.
104 -do- TDR No. 504341002 42,000/- Amita Puri -do-
105 Cosmos Co-op CC-995267 (TDR 42,000/- Neha Puri -do-
Bank Ltd., No. 981007)
Aundh, Pune.
106 -do- CC-995268 (TDR 42,000/- Divya Puri Closed
No. 981008)
107 -do- CC-995269 (TDR 42,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
No. 981009)
108 -do- CC-995270 (TDR 42,000/- Amita Puri -do-
No. 981010)
109 -do- SB-980677 3082.18 Divya Puri Closed
110 -do- SB-980679 3520.35 Neha Puri -do-
111 -do- SB-980680 5473.69 V.K.Puri -do-
112 Global Trust FDR No. 50,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Bank Ltd., Fort, 1900515953
Mumbai
113 -do- FDR No. 190051774 50,000/- Amita Puri -do-
114 ICICI Bank FDR No. 55,000/- V.K. Puri -do-
Ltd., 000715150342
Connaught
Place, New
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 12 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
Delhi
115 -do- FDR No. 55,000/- Amita Puri -do-
000715150343
116 HSBC, Fort FD-002-022721-051 55,000/- Amita Puri, -do-
Branch Mumbai V.K. Puri
117 -do- FD-002-022739-051 55,000/- V.K. Puri, -do-
Amita Puri
118 Standard FD-10283167 50,000 Amita Puri, -do-
Chartered V.K. Puri
Grindleys Bank
Ltd., BD Road,
Mumbai
119 -do- FD-10238178 50,000 -do- -do-
120 PNB, Evening MBFD-2559 50,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Service Puri
Branch, Paltan
Bazaar,
Dehradun
121 Standard FD-11665634 55,000 -do- Closed after
Chartered searches
Grindleys Bank
Ltd., Mumbai
Main Branch,
MG Road,
Mumbai
122 -do- FD-11665623 55,000 -do- -do-
123 -do- FD-11240485 50,000 -do-
124 FD-11240474 50,000 -do-
125 Standard FD-1122767-7 55,000 V.K. Puri/ -do-
Chartered Amita Puri
Grindleys Bank
Ltd., BD Road,
Mumbai
126 Standard FD-1222766-6 55,000 -do- -do-
Chartered
Grindleys Bank
Ltd., BD Road,
Mumbai
127 Standard SB-24529979 12,770.57 Amita Puri/ Frozen
Chartered V.K. Puri
Grindleys Bank
Ltd.,
Connaught
Place, New
Delhi
128 -do- FD-24637929 50,000 Closed after
search
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 13 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
129 -do- FD-24637930 50,000 -do-
130 HDFC Mistry FD-5014470054559 55,000 Amita Puri Frozen
Bhawan,
Mumbai
131 -do- FD-5014470054566 55,000 V.K. Puri -do-
132 HDFC Fort, FD-060447008675 45,000 Amita Puri -do-
Mumbai
133 -do- FD-0604470068665 45,000 V.K. Puri -do-
134 HDFC FC FD-1034680008970 48,000 V.K. Puri -do-
Road, Pune
135 -do- FD-1034680008980 48,000 Amita Puri -do-
136 -do- SB-1031000021171 0 -do-
137 -do- FD-1034470012361 48,000 -do-
138 Syndicate VCC-17188 (28046) 50,000 V.K. Puri -do-
Bank,
Dehradun
139 -do- VCC-17189 (28047) 50,000 Amita Puri -do-
140 -do- SB-16449 433 V.K. Puri/ -do-
Amita Puri
141 Canara Bank, SB-000021675 2,894 Vijay Kumar Closed after
Tamarind Lane, Puri searches
Mumbai
142 -do- KD-001108 50,000 -do- -do-
143 -do- KD-001107 50,000 Amita Puri -do-
144 Oriental Bank SB-93483 29,438.3 Vijay Kumar -do-
of Commerce, Puri/ Amita
Versova, Puri
Mumbai
145 -do- TD-152206 50,000 Vijay Kumar -do-
Puri
146 TD-260769 44,000 Neha Puri/ -do-
Vijay Kumar
Puri
147 TD-255421 43,000 Amita Puri -do-
148 Punjab SB-69911 10,987 Amita Puri/ -do-
National Bank, V.K. Puri
Kirti Nagar,
Delhi
149 -do- TD-18275 45,000 Neha Puri, -do-
V.K. Puri
150 -do- TD-18208 50,000 Amita Puri -do-
151 -do- TD-59338 49,000 Vijay Kumar -do-
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 14 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
Puri
152 Syndicate SB-36516 1,235.78 V.K. Puri -do-
Bank, Super
Bazar, Delhi
153 -do- VCC-45546 42,000 V.K. Puri -do-
154 -do- VCC-47972 15,000 V.K. Puri -do-
156 -do- VCC-47971 50,000 Amita Puri -do-
157 -do- VCC-47977 45,000 Neha Puri -do-
158 SBBJ, STDR-6144460 43,000 V.K. Puri/ Closed
Lokhandwala, Amita Puri
Andheri,
Mumbai
159 -do- STDR-614459 43,000 -do- Closed
160 -do- STDR-614645 44,000 Neha Puri, Closed
V.K. Puri
161 -do- SB-7461 65,465.02 V.K. Puri, Closed
Amita Puri
162 Syndicate SB-9538 0 V.K. / Amita
Bank, Malabar Puri
Hills, Mumbai
163 -do- VCC-10120 49,000 -do- Closed
164 -do- VCC-10121 8,000 -do- Closed
165 -do- VCC-10122 49,000 -do- Closed
166 -do- VCC-10119 41,857 -do- Closed
167 HDFC- Tulsiani Demat account No. 110 shares of
Chambers, 10148066 Reliance
Nariman Point, Industries
Mumbai
168 -do- Demat account No. 200 shares of
1016649 HDFC Ltd
169 -do- Demat account No. 110 shares of
10166510 Reliance
Industries
170 -do- Demat account No. 100 shares of
10166528 L&T
Total 8,045,982.56
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 15 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
8. Similarly, the details of the investments stated to have been made by accused V.K. Puri in his name or in the name of his family members during the check period in various Private Companies as mentioned in the chargesheet are as under:-
S. Name of the FDR No. Existing Balance/ Name of the Remarks No. Company Principal Amount Holder
1. Mahindra & FDR - 15184 16,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Mahindra Ltd.
2 -do- FDR - 15188 16,000 Neha Puri Frozen 3 -do- FDR - 15189 16,000 Divya Puri Frozen 4 -do- FDR - 15190 16,000 Amita Puri Frozen 5 Larsen & FDR - C2129649 20,000 Neha Puri Frozen Tourbro Ltd.
6 -do- FDR - C7129650 20,000 Amita Puri Frozen 7 -do- FDR - C2129648 20,000 Divya Puri Frozen 8 -do- FDR - C2129647 20,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 9 Camlin Ltd. FDR - 5005686 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 10 -do- FDR - 5005687 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 11 -do- FDR - 5005688 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 12 -do- FDR - 5005689 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 13 Kotak FDR - 481452 40,000 Amita Puri Frozen Mahindra Finance Ltd.
14 -do- FDR - 481453 40,000 Divya Puri Frozen 15 -do- FDR - 481451 40,000 Neha Puri Frozen 16 -do- FDR - 481450 40,000 Vijay Puri Frozen 17 RPG Cables FDR - 104527 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen Ltd.
18 -do- FDR - 104528 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 19 -do- FDR - 104529 12,000 Vijay Puri Frozen 20 -do- FDR - 104530 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 21 Escorts Ltd. FDR - B17827 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 22 -do- FDR - B17828 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 23 -do- FDR - B17829 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 24 -do- FDR - B17830 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 16 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 25 SRF Limited FDR - 710214 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 26 -do- FDR - 710215 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 27 -do- FDR - 710216 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 28 -do- FDR - 710217 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 29 Sri Adhikari FDR - 50185 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen Brothers TV Network Limited.
30 -do- FDR - 50186 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 31 -do- FDR - 50187 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 32 -do- FDR - 50188 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 33 Schenectady FDR - 8307 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Herdillia Limited 34 -do- FDR - 8308 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 35 -do- FDR - 8309 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 36 -do- FDR - 8310 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 37 Berger Paints CM3/8296 12,000 V. K. Puri Frozen India Limited 38 -do- CM3/8297 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 39 -do- CM3/8298 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 40 -do- CM3/8299 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 41 Steelage FD - 7590 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen Industries Ltd.
42 -do- FD - 7591 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 43 -do- FD - 7592 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 44 -do- FD - 7593 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 45 Camphor & FD - 32387 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen Allied Products Limited, Mumbai 46 -do- FD - 32388 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 47 -do- FD - 32388 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 48 -do- FD - 32390 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 49 Dr. Morepen FD-BOMDX-01996 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen Laboratories Ltd., New Delhi 50 -do- FD-BOMDX-01999 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 51 -do- FD-BOMDX-02000 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 52 -do- FD-BOMDX-06372 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 17 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 53 CEAT Ltd. FD - 3047926 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 54 -do- FD - 3047927 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 55 -do- FD - 3047928 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 56 -do- FD - 3047929 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 57 Nagarjuna FD-C3616023809 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Fertilizers & Chemical Ltd.
58 -do- FD-C3616023810 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 59 -do- FD-C3616023808 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 60 -do- FD-C3616023807 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 61 Bajaj Tempo FD - 71649 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen Ltd.
62 -do- FD - 71650 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 63 -do- FD - 71652 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 64 -do- FD - 71654 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 65 SESA Goa Ltd. CDR - 004953 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 66 -do- CDR - 004951 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 67 -do- CDR - 004952 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 68 -do- CDR - 004950 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 69 Dabur India FD-001DX19946 11,000 Divya Puri Prematur Ltd. ed refunded on 28.02.20 02 vide warrant 70 -do- FD-001DX19948 11,000 V.K. Puri -do- 71 -do- FD-001DX19947 11,000 Amita Puri -do- 72 -do- FD-001DX19945 11,000 Neha Puri -do- 73 Mukund FD-A-943 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Engineers Ltd.
74 -do- FD-A-941 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 75 -do- FD-A-944 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 76 -do- FD-A-942 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 77 Mukund Ltd. A-27075 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 78 -do- A-27078 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 79 -do- A-27077 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 80 -do- A-27076 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 81 Kalyani Steels FD - 48858 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 18 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ld. 82 -do- FD - 48859 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 83 -do- FD - 48860 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 84 -do- FD - 48861 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 85 Bharat Forge CUFD-500400 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Ltd.
86 -do- CUFD-500403 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 87 -do- CUFD-500402 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 88 -do- CUFD-500401 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 89 Usha Beltron FD- 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Ltd.
90 -do- FD- 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 91 -do- FD- 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 92 -do- FD- 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 93 Datamatics Ltd. FD-Z5921 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 94 -do- FD-Z5922 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 95 -do- FD-Z5926 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 96 -do- FD-Z5927 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 97 Steel Authority Refund Order No. 11,000 V.K. Puri Refunde of India Ltd. 820388 d on 25.02.20 02 98 -do- Refund Order No. 11,000 Amita Puri Refunde 820389 d on 25.02.20 02 99 -do- Refund Order No. 11,000 Neha Puri Refunde 820390 d on 25.02.20 02 100 -do- Refund Order No. 11,000 Divya Puri Refunde 820391 d on 25.02.20 02 101 Jubilant FD - 80815 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Organosys Ltd.
102 -do- FD - 80816 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 103 -do- FD - 80817 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 104 -do- FD - 80818 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 105 Modern TL - 01000 9,900 V.K. Puri Frozen Threads (India CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 19 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ltd.) 106 -do- TL - 01001 9,900 Amita Puri Frozen 107 -do- TL - 01003 9,900 Divya Puri Frozen 108 -do- TL - 01004 9,900 Neha Puri Frozen 109 Modern Syntex SL - 00652 9,900 V.K. Puri Frozen (India Ltd.) 110 -do- SL - 00651 9,900 Amita Puri Frozen 111 -do- SL - 00653 9,900 Divya Puri Frozen 112 -do- SL - 00650 9,900 Neha Puri Frozen 113 Belar Pur FD - 185283 12,000 V.K. Puri Frozen Industries Ltd.
114 -do- FD - 185284 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 115 -do- FD - 185285 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 116 -do- FD - 185286 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen 117 TATA Tea Ltd. FCP-2000752 11,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 118 -do- FCP-2000754 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 119 -do- FCP-2000753 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 120 -do- FCP-2000755 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 121 Zuari Industries FD - 743039 13,000 Divya Puri Frozen Ltd.
122 -do- FD - 743040 13,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 123 -do- FD - 743041 13,000 Amita Puri Frozen 124 -do- FD - 743042 13,000 Neha Puri Frozen 125 TISCO FD - 293464 16,000 V.K. Puri Frozen 126 -do- FD - 293467 16,000 Amita Puri Frozen 127 -do- FD - 293466 16,000 Divya Puri Frozen 128 -do- FD - 293465 16,000 Neha Puri Frozen 129 VIP Industries FD - 202137 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Ltd.
130 -do- FD - 202139 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 131 -do- FD - 202138 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 132 -do- FD - 202130 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 133 Roofit Ind. Ltd. FDR - 50703 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 134 -do- FDR - 50700 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 135 -do- FDR - 50702 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 136 -do- FDR - 50701 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 20 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 137 Excel FDR - 115319 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen Industries Ltd.
138 -do- FDR - 115317 12,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 139 -do- FDR - 115424 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 140 -do- FDR - 115316 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 141 Cable FD - 608608 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai 142 -do- FD - 608607 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 143 -do- FD - 608606 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 144 -do- FD - 608597 11,000 Vijay kumar Frozen Puri 145 Apcotex FDR - 351 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen Lattices Ltd.
146 -do- FDR - 352 12,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 147 -do- FDR - 353 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 148 -do- FDR - 354 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 149 Mcdowell & Co. FDR - 32020055 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen Ltd.
150 -do- FDR - 32020057 12,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 151 -do- FDR - 32020054 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen 152 -do- FDR - 32020056 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen 153 Titan Industries FDR - 19126 15,000 Neha Puri Frozen Ltd.
154 -do- FDR - 19126 15,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 155 -do- FDR - 19126 15,000 Divya Puri Frozen 156 -do- FDR - 19126 15,000 Amita Puri Frozen 157 Godfrey Phillips FDR 13,000 Neha Puri Frozen Ltd.
158 -do- FDR 13,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 159 -do- FDR 13,000 Divya Puri Frozen 160 -do- FDR 13,000 Amita Puri Frozen 161 Alliance New Mutual Fund Folio 10,000 Neha Puri Frozen Millenium No. 111326/90 162 -do- Mutual Fund Folio 10,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 21 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. No.111328/84 Puri 163 -do- Mutual Fund Folio 10,000 Divya Puri Frozen No. 111327/87 164 -do- Mutual Fund Folio 10,000 Amita Puri Frozen No. 111220/20 165 Apollo Tyres FDR-AFD 27426 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Ltd.
166 -do- FDR-AFD 27424 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 167 -do- FDR-AFD 274425 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 168 -do- FDR-AFD 27427 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 169 Saurashtra FDR - 6000570 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Cement Ltd.
170 -do- FDR - 6000567 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 171 -do- FDR - 6000569 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 172 -do- FDR - 6000568 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 173 Ashima Ltd., FD- C375057 11,000 Vijay Kumar Paid by Ahemdabad Puri the Company in April, 2002 174 -do- FD- C375055 11,000 Amita Puri -do- 175 -do- FD- C375056 11,000 Divya PUri -do- 176 -do- FD- C375058 11,000 Neha Puri -do- 177 Dharamsi FDR - 9906924 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Morarji Chemical Co.
Ltd.
178 -do- FDR - 9906927 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 179 -do- FDR - 9906925 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 180 -do- FDR - 9906926 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 181 Crompton FDR - 661817 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Greaves Ltd.
182 -do- FDR - 661829 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 183 -do- FDR - 661832 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 184 -do- FDR - 661844 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 185 BPL Ltd., FD - 46624 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Bangalore CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 22 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 186 -do- FD - 46631 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 187 -do- FD - 46630 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 188 -do- FD - 46629 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 189 Godrej FDR - 437455 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Industries Ltd. Puri 190 -do- FDR - 437454 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 191 SPIC FDR - 505192 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Industries Ltd.
192 -do- FDR - 505190 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 193 -do- FDR - 505193 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 194 -do- FDR - 505191 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 195 Raymond Ltd. FDR - 219340 16,000 Neha Puri Frozen 196 -do- FDR - 151954 16,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 197 -do- FDR - 219339 16,000 Divya Puri Frozen 198 -do- FDR - 151953 16,000 Amita Puri Frozen 199 IL&FS Ltd. FDR - 3/57958 14,000 Neha Puri Frozen 200 -do- FDR - 3/57954 14,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 201 -do- FDR - 3/57955 14,000 Divya Puri Frozen 202 -do- FDR - 3/57952 14,000 Amita Puri Frozen 203 ACC FDR - 739279 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen 204 -do- FDR - 739277 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 205 -do- FDR - 739278 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 206 -do- FDR - 739280 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 207 Godrej & FDR - 155915 16,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Boyce Puri Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
208 -do- FDR - 155914 16,000 Divya Puri Frozen 209 -do- FDR - 155918 16,000 Amita Puri Frozen 210 -do- FDR - 155916 16,000 Neha Puri Frozen 211 HDFC Ltd. FDR - 3795828 42,000 Neha Puri Frozen 212 -do- FDR - 3796520 42,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 213 -do- FDR - 3795794 42,000 Divya Puri Frozen CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 23 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 214 -do- FDR - 3796221 42,000 Amita Puri Frozen 215 Whirlpool FDR - 2569/2 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen Home Appliances 216 -do- FDR - 25700/2 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen 217 -do- FDR - 25701/2 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen 218 -do- FDR - 25702/2 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen Puri 219 Amit Spinning Share Certificate 5,000 Amita/ V.K. Frozen Industries Ltd. No. 4093 to 4097, Puri Distinctive No. 1713201 to 1713700 (100 shares) 220 Krishna Bond 5,000 Neha Puri Frozen Bhagya Jal KBD 640473 Nigam Ltd, Bangalore 221 -do- Bond 5,000 Divya Puri Frozen KBD 640474 222 -do- Bond 5,000 Amita Puri Frozen KBD 640475 223 -do- Bond 5,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen KBD 640476 Puri 224 Ahmedabad Bonds 16,000 Neha Puri Frozen Municipal 752074-89 (16 Corporation bonds) 225 -do- Bonds 16,000 Amita Puri Frozen 752090-105 (16 bonds) 226 -do- Bonds 16,000 Divya Puri Frozen 7520106-21 (16 bonds) 227 -do- Bonds 16,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen 7520122-37 (16 Puri bonds) 228 Reliance 25 Shares - D 5,004 Vijay Kumar Issued Industries Ltd. Nos. Puri against 387473475-499 debentur es, Investme nt towards debentur es reflected as asset CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 24 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 229 -do- 391119905-934 5,004 -do- -do-
(30 shares) 230 -do- 387473500-524 5,004 Amita Puri -do-
231 -do- 391119875-904 5,004 -do- -do-
232 Lumax 8317793-812 1,000 Vijay Kumar Issued in
Industries Ltd. Puri lieu of
100
shares of
LLLH. Of
Rs. 10/-
each
233 -do- 7501401-20 1,000 Amita Puri -do-
234 Cummins D-168151 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
India Ltd., Puri
Pune
235 -do- D-168152 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen
236 -do- D-168153 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen
237 -do- D-168154 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen
238 SBI Home B-60/6000002348 34,000 Vijay Kumar Pay
Finance Ltd., Puri Order
Kolkatta issued
stop
payment
instructio
n given
on
01.11.20
02
239 -do- B-60/6000002345 34,000 Amita Puri -do-
240 -do- B-60/6000002346 34,000 Divya Puri -do-
241 -do- B-60/6000002347 34,000 Neha Puri -do-
242 The Prag 100 Shares - 1,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Bosimi Distinctive Nos Puri
Synthetics 44521901 to
Ltd., Guwahati 44522000
243 Finolex 100-Shares- 4,000 Amita Puri Frozen
Industries Distinctive Nos
Ltd., Pune 93889973 to
93890172
244 ITC WBO- 085110521 11,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Bhadrachalam Puri
Ltd., Kolkata
245 -do- WBO- 085110518 11,000 Amita Puri Frozen
246 -do- WBO- 085110519 11,000 Divya Puri Frozen
247 -do- WBO- 085110520 11,000 Neha Puri Frozen
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 25 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
248 Modern Terry WL-01343 9,900 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Towels Ltd., Puri
Jaipur
249 -do- WL-01340 9,900 Amita Puri Frozen
250 -do- WL-01341 9,900 Neha Puri Frozen
251 -do- WL-01342 9,900 Divya Puri Frozen
252 -do- 200 Shares - 6,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Distinctive Nos. Puri
17694951 to
17695050,
31494951 to
31495050
253 -do- 200 Shares - 6,000 Amita Puri Frozen
Distinctive Nos.
17694851 to
17694950,
31494851 to
31494950
254 Modern Syntex 100 Shares - 3,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Ltd., Jaipur Distinctive nos. Puri
40025001 to
40025050,
86691701 to
86691750
255 -do- 100 Shares - 3,000 Amita Puri Frozen
Distinctive nos.
37175351 to
37175400,
83842051 to
83842100
256 United 100 Shares- 3,500 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Breweries distinctive nos. Puri
(Holdings) 24613201 to
Ltd., 24613300
Bangalore
257 ION Exchange FD - B6296 12,000 Divya Puri Frozen
(1) Ltd.,
Mumbai
258 -do- FD - B6297 12,000 Vijay Kumar Frozen
Puri
259 -do- FD - B6298 12,000 Amita Puri Frozen
260 -do- FD - B6299 12,000 Neha Puri Frozen
Total 3,290,316
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 26 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
9. The details of the movable assets other than bank
accounts/deposits with private companies amassed by V.K. Puri in his name or in the name of his family members are given in the chargesheet as under:-
1. P.O. N.S. Bureau, Fort, Mumbai (I) KVP nos. 10958, 59, 60 & 61 dated 24.04.2000 Rs.10,000.00 each
(ii) KVP nos. 10964, 65, 66 & 67 dated 25.04.2000 Rs.10,000.00 each
(iii)KVP nos. 11385, 86 & 87 dated 10.07.2000 Rs.40,000.00 each
2. P.O. Aundh Township, Pune
(i) MIS Account Nos. 23868, 69, 70, & 71 dated 17/24.3.99 Rs.48,000.00 each
(ii) RD Account Nos. 110464, 65, 66 & 67 dated 12.5.99 Rs. 480 pm each
3. Relief Bonds issued by Stock Holding Corporation of India Limited
(i) BLA No. SHCPN BL0001039 Rs. 3,00,000/-
(ii) BLA No. SHCPN BL0001075 Rs. 2,15,000/-
(iii)BLA No. SHCPN BL0001046 Rs. 60,000/-
4. Units with UTI (Rs. 60,000/-)
(i) Folio No. 1121830039193 Rs. 10,000/-
(ii) Folio No. 1121830039202 Rs. 10,000/-
(iii) Folio No. 1121830039194 Rs. 10,000/-
(iv) Folio No. 1121830039192 Rs. 10,000/-
5. ICICI BONDS
(i) Folio No. 3052480-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(ii) Folio No. 3052481-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(iii) Folio No. 3052482-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(iv) Folio No. 3052483-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(v) Folio No. 4252841-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(vi) Folio No. 4252842-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(vii) Folio No. 4252844-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(viii) Folio No. 4252845-three bonds Rs. 15,000/-
(ix) Folio No. 6476289-two bonds Rs. 10,000/-
(x) Folio No. 6476290-two bonds Rs. 10,000/-
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 27 of 197(xi) Folio No. 8404851-four bonds Rs. 20,000/-
(xii) Folio No. 8404852-four bonds Rs. 20,000/-
(xiii) Folio No. 1696921-four bonds Rs. 20,000/-
(xiv) Folio No. 1696916-four bonds Rs. 20,000/-
6. IDBI Bonds held with IDBI, Bombay Rs. 95,000/-
10. The details of the expenditure incurred by accused V.K. Puri upon himself or upon his family members during the check period is given in the chargesheet as under:-
1. Premium for LIC Policies.
(i) LIC, CBO-II, Chakrata Road, Dehradun Policy No. 48125083 Rs. 7,570/-
(ii) LIC, Branch 921, Maharishi Dadhichi road, Mumbai CBO-II, Bima Nivesh Policy No. 901478859 Rs.1,84,720.00
(iii) LIC, Branch 95A, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune Bima Nivesh Policy No. 954402828 Rs. 61,907.00
2. Membership of Clubs :
(i) Dehradun Club Limited, Dehradun : Rs.47,950/-
(ii) Poona Club Limited, Pune : Rs.18,777/-
(iii) Cricket Club of India, Mumbai : Rs.5,000/-
(iv) Yeshwant Club, Indore : Rs. 7,324.50
(v) Delhi Gymkhana Club, New Delhi : Rs. 5,260/-
3. Education of daughters at Villa Theresa High School, Mumbai : Rs.37,930/-
4. Education of daughters at Choithram School, Indore : Rs.41,460/-
5. Education of Ms. Neha Puri at Symbiosis College of Arts, Pune: Rs.7,665/-
6. Education of Ms. Neha Puri at Symbiosis Institute of Business Management, Pune : Rs.16,250/-
7. Education of Ms. Divya Puri at NIFT, Mumbai : Rs.1,10,000/-
8. Foreign Visits/other tours undertaken by family members: Rs.1,48,621/-CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 28 of 197
9. Interest paid against loan accounts :
(i) Canara Bank, Tamerind Lane Branch, Mumbai Loan account nos. GA VSL 002 and GA VSL 003 Rs. 24,005/-
(ii) Oriental Bank of Commerce, Versova
Loan account nos. 9649 and 9650 Rs.23,696/-
10. Locker Charges at OBC, Versova (locker No. 805) : Rs.4,700/-
11. Mobile no. 98230-30695 with M/s BPL Cellujlar Limited, Pune : Rs.16,016.32
11. In order to explain said disproportion, the accused Vijay Kumar Puri and his wife Amita Puri have furnished photocopies of 86 bills showing purported sale of Gold Jewelery and Silver Utensils to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, the proprietor of which is accused Vinesh Vyas, to the tune of Rs. 87,10,259/- during the period September, 1992 to January, 1995. These bills reflected purported sale of Gold Jewelery weighing 20,108.452 gms. worth Rs.
76,62,902/- and Silver Utensils weighing 197.238 Kgs worth Rs. 10,47,357. Each of these 86 bills are stated to bear signatures of Amita Puri. The plea taken by accused Vijay Kumar Puri is that the said Gold Jewelery and Silver Utensils were brought by his father Sh. Inder Sain Puri alongwith him from Pakistan in the year 1947 at the time of partition of India and had given the same to his daughter-in-law i.e. Amita Puri at the time of her marriage in the year 1979. It was stated by accused Vijay Kumar Puri that various investments made by him were out of the money received from the purported sale of said gold jewelery and silver utensils.
12. Investigation has revealed that neither Inder Sain Puri nor Amita Puri ever filed any Wealth Tax Return or Gift Tax Return or any CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 29 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Declaration under Gold Control Act in respect of these Jewellery Items and Utensils. They have also not reported the sale of the Jewellery to Income Tax/Sale Tax Authorities. Accused Vijay Kumar Puri has also not declared the acquisition/possession/disposal of the said gold jewelery/silver utensils to the competent authority as provided under CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964. It is stated that during the course of investigation of this case, accused Amita Puri filed revised Income Tax Returns in the month of October, 2002 and thus belatedly sought to account for huge income as a result of the sale of said Gold Jewellery & Silver Utensils.
13. It is further mentioned in the chargesheet that M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, is a small firm dealing in artificial diamonds/silver stone jewelery and had never dealt in sale or purchase of Gold Jewellery or Silver Utensils. It was also found during the investigation that the aforesaid 86 bills were not reflected in the books of accounts of the firm or in its Sales Tax Returns and Income Tax Returns. It was revealed during the investigation that these bills were fraudulently got prepared by accused Vinesh Vyas from Sh. Girish Jain who had been his employee and Dipesh Vyas who is his Cousin, in June - July 2002 after this case was registered.
14. Thus, the Investigating Officer disregarded these bills as fictitious and concluded that accused Vijay Kumar Puri has come in the possession of assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs. 1,30,70,863.61 during the period 01.06.1988 to 22.02.2002 and his wife i.e Amita Puri actively abetted him in commission of the offence and accused Vinesh Vyas conspired with CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 30 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. them by getting prepared the aforesaid 86 false/fabricated bills. Accordingly, chargesheet was laid before the concerned court.
15. Upon perusal of the chargesheet and after taking cognizance of the offences mentioned therein, all the three (03) accused were summoned. In pursuance to order on charge dt. 27.10.2006, charges were framed against the three accused on 06.11.2006 as under:-
(i) For the offence U/s 120B IPC r/w Section 193 IPC against all the three accused.
(ii) For the offence U/s 13(2) r/w 13 (1)(e) P.C. Act 1988 against accused Vijay Kumar Puri.
(iii) For the offence U/s 109 IPC r/w 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of PC Act 1988 against the accused Amita Puri.
(iv) For the offence U/s 193 IPC against accused Vinesh Vyas.
16. It is pertinent to note here that aforesaid order on charge dt. 27.10.2006 was assailed by accused Vinesh Vyas in the Hon'ble High Court by way of Criminal Revision Petition No. 550/07. The said revision petition was allowed by the High Court vide order dt. 22.01.2010 and the said order dated 27.10.2006, so far as it directed framing of charges against accused Vinesh Vyas, was set aside. Accordingly, the trial continued only against the two accused namely Vijay Kumar Puri and his wife Amita Puri.
17. The prosecution has examined 154 witnesses to bring home the guilt of accused. A Large number of these witnesses are from various Banks/Financial Institutions/Private Companies/LIC etc. in which the accused are stated to have parked their ill gotten money by way of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 31 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. investments in the nature of Fixed Deposit etc. PW15, PW19, PW24, PW25, PW29, PW30, PW33, PW44, PW71, PW109, PW110, PW121, PW126, PW127, PW128, PW130, PW150, PW152 & 153 are the witnesses which are not related to the Banks, Financial Institutions & Private Companies, LIC etc in which the accused are alleged to have invested the ill gotten money. PW19 had accorded sanction for prosecution of accused Vijay Kumar Puri in this case. PW153 & PW154 are the CBI Officers. PW154 is the Investigating Officer and PW153 had conducted searches at some places on the directions of PW154. PW152 had examined the documents of this case in the FSL and has given his opinion accordingly. PW121 has worked with M/s Ambika Jewelers, Indore, for about 3 years and left the said job in the year 2000. The deposition of these witnesses would be noted and discussed at appropriate places in the judgment hereinafter.
18. The accused, during their examination U/s 313 Cr. PC denied all the incriminating evidence put to them and claimed false implication. It was stated that the IO has not shown the income of accused from various sources during the check period correctly and has deliberately overlooked the interest income which is manifest from the documents enclosed with the chargesheet itself. It was also stated that in order to foist a false and frivolous case upon the accused, the IO suppressed various documents collected during the course of the investigation but which favored the accused. It is also contended that various witnesses examined by the prosecution do not have the personal knowledge about the contents of the documents sought to be proved by them and also about the execution of those documents and, therefore, the documents exhibited by them during their testimony CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 32 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. cannot be considered at all.
19. The accused, besides examining eight(8) witnesses in their defence, have also entered themselves in the witness box as DW9 and DW10 to establish their innocence. DW1 is the Chartered Accountant who has been filing Income Tax Returns of accused Vijay Kumar Puri. DW2 was posted as Stenographer attached to accused Vijay Kumar Puri in the year 2001-2002 when he was Commissioner Customs, Lucknow. He has proved various T.A. Bills submitted by accused Vijay Kumar Puri in the Office. DW3, DW4 & DW5 are the Elder Brothers of accused Vijay Kumar Puri. DW6 is the younger brother of accused Amita Puri. DW7 is running a Jewelery Shop at Manik Chowk, Ahmedabad under the name and style of M/s Choksi Pradeep Kumar Mani Lal & Brothers. According to him, Vinesh Vyas, the proprietor of M/s Ambika Jewelers, Indore used to sell his old jewelery to his (latter's) firm through one Broker named Bhana Bhai during the year 1992-1995. DW8 also deals in gold and silver at Manik Chowk, Ahemdabad since 1982.
20. It needs note here that several documents filed alongwith the chargesheet have been admitted by the accused during the course of trial on various dates i.e. 10.01.2008, 27.02.2015, 13.04.2015, 19.01.2017 and 06.02.2017. The details of these documents are given hereunder:-
Documents admitted on 10.01.2008 :
(i) By A1 Vijay Kumar Puri - Ex. P-1, Ex. P-20, Ex.P-22 to Ex.P-24, Ex.P-26, Ex.P-
27 & Ex.P-33.
(ii)By A2 Amita Puri - Ex.P- 1, Ex.P-12 to Ex.P-
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 33 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 15, Ex.P-21, Ex.P-25, Ex.P-28 to Ex.P-32, Ex.P-
34 and Ex.P-35.
(iii)By A3 Vinesh Vyas - Ex.P-36 to Ex.P-41.
Documents admitted on 27.02.2015 :
(i) By A1 Vijay Kumar Puri - Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-49 Documents admitted on 13.04.2015 :
(i) By A1 Vijay Kumar Puri - Ex.A-50 to Ex.A-89
(ii) By A2 Amita Puri - Ex.A-50 to Ex.A-89 Documents admitted on 19.01.2017 :
(i) By A1 Vijay Kumar Puri - Ex. A-90
(ii) By A2 Amita Puri - Ex.A-90
Documents admitted on 06.02.2017 :
(i)By A1 Vijay Kumar Puri - Ex.A-91, Ex.A-92 and
Ex.A-93.
(ii)By A2 Amita Puri - Ex.A-91, Ex.A-92 and
Ex.A-93.
21. I have heard the Ld. PP Sh. Neetu Singh as well as Ld. Defence Counsels Sh. R. K. Handoo & Aditya Chaudhary, Advocates on various dates starting from 10.05.2019. The final arguments concluded on 16.09.2019. During the course of arguments, Ld. PP as well as Ld. Defence Counsel took me through the entire voluminous oral as well as documentary evidence on record. I have also perused the written submissions as well as various charts/tables submitted by CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 34 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the defence counsels during the course of their arguments. Large number of judgments were referred to by both the sides which also have been perused.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
22. Ld. PP argued that the deposition of the witnesses from banks as well as the private companies examined by CBI and the documents proved by them clearly show that the accused Vijay Kumar Puri had made investments in these banks/private companies in his name as well as in the name of his wife and two daughters. He submitted that the total value of such investments made by the accused exceeds their total income during the check period multiple times which indicates that these investments were made only from the ill gotten money. With regards to the bills issued by M/s. Ambika Jewellers, Indore in the name of accused Amita Puri for the gold jewellery and silver utensils purported to be sold by her to the said firm, the Ld. PP argued that these are fictitious and fabricated bills and no such sale was made by her. He referred to the deposition of PW121, who has been working with M/s Ambika Jewellers for about 3 years prior to the year 2000, to argue that these bills have been prepared by this witness alongwith one Dipesh on the asking of accused Vinesh Vyas (Since Discharged) after the commencement of the investigation in this case as Vinesh Vyas had been taken into confidence by the accused Vijay Kumar Puri in this regard.
23. It was further argued by Ld. PP that even if the amounts reflected in the documents admitted by accused Vijay Kumar Puri and Amita Puri during the course of admission/denial of documents on CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 35 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. various dates as well as during the course of their testimony before this court as DW9 & DW10, alone are taken into consideration, that also exceeds the legitimate income of the accused during the check period multiple times. He argued that the evidence led by the prosecution proves the charges against the two accused beyond any reasonable doubt and therefore, both of them are liable to be convicted.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DEFENCE COUNSEL
24. Sh. Handoo, Advocate commenced his arguments by attacking the FIR itself. He argued that the registration of FIR straightaway without conducting any preliminary enquiry is impermissible and in violation of the CBI Manual. He pointed out that the FIR in this case was registered on 22.02.2002 on the basis of a "Source Information"
but the said source has nowhere been discussed in the chargesheet or during the trial of the case which makes the FIR itself as doubtful document and hence, the entire investigation gets vitiated. It was submitted by the Ld. Counsel that in the absence of any specific complaint, it was incumbent upon CBI to have conducted a suitable preliminary enquiry to enquire into the allegations made against the public servant, before lodging the FIR. He further submitted that the check period has been mentioned in the FIR as November, 1976 to 31.03.1999 which has lateron been changed and mentioned as 01.06.1988 to 22.02.2002 in the chargesheet but the reason and basis for the said change has nowhere been explained in the chargesheet. He also argued that the main ingredients of the offence U/s 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are missing in the FIR as well as in the chargesheet.CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 36 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
25. The Ld. Defence Counsel, then, argued that there is distinction between "Misconduct" and "Criminal Misconduct". He submitted that the acts attributed to the accused in this case may, at best amount to misconduct but do not fall in the category of criminal misconduct in order to attract the criminal liability under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He tried to explain it by saying that the savings made by the accused are from his legitimate earnings other than the salary received by him such as sale of ancestral jewellery by his wife, which he did not report to his office and there is no evidence on record to show that he indulged in corruption. He argued that in case the public servant comes into possession of certain assets from legitimate source but does not inform his office or tax authorities about the same, it would be regarded only as misconduct by that public servant but would never tantamount to criminal misconduct as envisaged U/s 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
26. It was further argued by Ld. Counsel that the investigation done in this case has not been proper and impartial. He contended that the IO has clubbed the income of both the accused whereas accused Amita Puri was herself employed and earning independently. He would submit that the income of Amita Puri could not have been made subject to any scrutiny and she has been arraigned as accused in this case only because she is the wife of Vijay Kumar Puri. It is his submission that the clubbing of the income of husband and wife is not permissible under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the income/expenditure/savings of both of them should have been examined and calculated independently of each other. He also argued that the IO has collected documentary evidence in this case in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 37 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. violation of the spirit of Sections 161 & 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel referred to the cross-examination of the IO recorded on 08.05.2018 wherein he has deposed that he was not having any authorization letter U/s 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for inspecting the bank records and for obtaining certified copies of those records from the banks.
27. The Ld. Defence Counsel further submitted that the statements and other documents of various banks/private companies proved by the respective witnesses are not accompanied by the Certificates either under Bankers Books Evidence Act or U/s 65 (B) of Evidence Act and hence, none of those can be considered in evidence. He also pointed out that most of those documents are photocopies which have been exhibited during the testimonies of concerned witnesses without fulfilling the conditions for leading secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Evidence Act. He also argued that the mandate of Section 17 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has also been flouted with impurity as none of the four Investigating Officers who have collected the documents in this case was having any authorization under the said provision of law which renders whole investigation illegal. He also argued that since there is no preliminary enquiry conducted in this case, the registration of the FIR without such enquiry and also the investigation becomes illegal.
28. It was also argued by Ld. Counsel that the inventory Ex. PW-7/B with regards to the articles/movable goods alleged to have been found in the residence of the accused is totally inadmissible in law for the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 38 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. reason that the search has been conducted without any proper authority and the list bearing the signatures of one of the accused i.e. Amita Puri, is hit by Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also pointed out that the list does not reflect the actual market value of the goods as on the date of the search and therefore, the value of the goods shown therein has to be disregarded. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that PW121 is not a reliable witness as he admits having been pressurized by CBI to give his statement U/s 164 Cr. PC before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate as per their likings.
29. Ld. Counsel submitted three charts as per which the total income earned by the accused V.K. Puri during the check period was Rs. 38,04,709.8 and the income earned by accused Amita Puri was Rs. 1,63,56,036/- during that period (Total Rs. 2,01,60,745/-), whereas the prosecution has shown their total income during the check period as Rs. 42,41,557.75 only. As per the third chart produced by Ld. Counsel, the two daughters of the accused namely Neha and Divya had earned Rs. 4,87,173/- and 5,94,596/- respectively after they attained majority on 04.01.1999 and 24.12.2000 respectively. Similarly, the Ld. Counsel produced some more charts/tables to show that the investments stated to be made by the two accused during the check period and their expenditure during this period are false, incorrect and inflated. The contents of these charts/tables would be discussed in detail hereinafter.
30. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel that major portion of investments made by the two accused during the check period in their name and in the name of their two minor daughters was from the sale proceeds of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 39 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the gold and silver utensils given to accused Amita Puri by her father- in-law. It is submitted that the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) coupled with the deposition of PW-121, DW-2, DW-7, DW-8 and DW-11 prove the explanation offered by the accused that they had got cash from the sale of gold and silver utensils which they invested in banks and private companies. According to the Ld. Counsel, the Investigating Officer has malafidely and mischievously rejected these contentions of the accused.
31. It was thus argued by Ld. Counsel that the prosecution has failed to lead any cogent and legally admissible evidence to prove that the investments reflected in the deposition of witnesses from the banks/private companies and the documents proved by them, have been made by accused Vijay Kumar Puri with the aid of accused Amita Puri and therefore, whole case of the prosecution falls to the ground which would lead to the inevitable conclusion that accused are innocent and hence liable to be acquitted.
32. The Ld. Counsel cited various judgments of the High Court as well as Apex Court in support of his submissions. He has relied upon the Judgment of the Supreme Court in U. Sree Versus U. Srinivas 2013 2 SCC 114, to canvas that the secondary evidence related to the contents of a document is inadmissible until the non-production of the original is accounted for so as to bring it within one or the other of the cases provided for in Section 65 of the Evidence Act ; Ashok Tshering Bhutia Vs. State of Sikkim, 2011 4 SCC 402, to canvas that before a public servant is charged with an act of dishonesty which amounts to serious misdemeanor and an FIR is lodged against him, CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 40 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. there must be some suitable preliminary enquiry into the allegations by a responsible officer; State Of Maharashtra Vs. Wasudeo Ramchandra Kaidalwar, 1981 3 SCC 199, to canvas that the extent and nature of burden of proof resting upon the public servant found in possession of disproportionate assets cannot be higher than to establish his case by preponderance of probabilities and where the accused public servant produces evidence to show that the assets found in his possession did not belong to him but to his ancestors, it is sufficient to create doubt in the prosecution case; Pratibha Rani Vs. Suraj Kumar And Another, 1985 2SCC 370, to canvas that the gifts received by a married lady from her parents in law come within the definition of Stridhan, of which she becomes absolute owner and competent to deal with those in any manner she likes and her husband has no right or interest in the same; State Inspector of Police, Vishakhapatnam Vs. Surya Sankaram Karri, 2006 7SCC 172, to canvas that investigation in a corruption case without authorization U/s 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is totally illegal.
33. He also cited a Judgment of Madras High Court reported as D. Janardhanan & Another Vs. State, 2018 SCC Crl. LJ 4934 in which the duties of the Investigation Officer in a case of disproportionate assets against a public servant have been held to be as under :-
The investigating officer should asses the value of the assets of the public servant immediately prior to the check period with relevance to the tax returns of the concerned person and also loans and other incomes available to the person and also about the liability of the person prior to the check period.
The actual income during the check period and the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 41 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. expenditure actually incurred by the public servant should be calculated without any inflation and on a reasonable basis.
The total income during the check period and assets prior to the check period must be taken together as the assets of the public servant from which the actual expenditure and amounts saved either by cash or by properties must be deducted from the total amount and see whether there is much disproportion to the known sources of income of the public servant and the assets on his hand. While making the calculation regarding the value of the properties and expenditure a reasonable margin has to be given this way or that way to find out the truth. Such kind of procedure to be adopted only by an unbiased Investigating Officer. There should be no suppression of income or under estimation of the income of the accused or inflation of the expenditure or inflation of the assets of the accused.
The Investigating Officer should not suppress any of the income, by way of the loan or gift while considering the income of the public servant.
Similarly after finding out that there is any disproportionate wealth in the hands of the public servant beyond his known sources of income, the accused must be given an opportunity to explain the same. Failure to give an opportunity to the accused to explain the same is fatal to the prosecution.
34. The Ld. Counsel referred to another Judgment of Bombay High Court in Bank of Baroda, Bombay Vs. Shree Moti Industries, Bombay & Ors., 2009 (1) Mh. L.J. 282, to buttress his submissions that the person giving oral evidence with regard to a document must have himself seen and read the original document and not a mere copy and a document cannot be state to have been proved by the evidence of a person who cannot vouch for truth of the facts recorded in the document.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 42 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Submissions In Rebuttal By Ld. Public Prosecutor
35. In rebuttal, Ld. PP pointed out that the witnesses from the banks as well as private companies have by and large proved original documents with regards to the investments made by the accused in their own name and in the name of their two minor daughters in those banks/private companies and those witnesses have not been cross- examined on any material aspect on behalf of the accused. He also pointed out that no suggestion has been given to these witnesses that the documents produced and proved by them do not pertain to the accused V.K. Puri and Amita Puri and their two minor daughters. In view of the same, the Ld. PP argued, the accused cannot be heard to say that the investments reflected in the documents proved by these witnesses do not pertain to them merely for the reason that these are not accompanied by the Certificate under Bankers Books Evidence Act and U/s 65B of Evidence Act.
36. The Ld. PP also argued that the Certificate under Bankers Book Evidence Act is required only when the bank, on the strength of its record, intends to prove the liability of its borrowers towards itself which is not the case herein. He pointed out that in this case, the witnesses from the banks and private companies have admitted their liability towards the accused stating that the accused have made investments in those banks/private companies and therefore, the record proved by them cannot be disbelieved merely for want of any such certificate.
37. It is also argued by Ld. PP that the accused have not lodged any complaint stating that their names have been misused by CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 43 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. someone in making investments in their names in the aforesaid banks/private companies. At the same time, it is also pointed out by the Ld. PP that the accused have not denied their identity documents and photographs which have been supplied to these banks/private companies at the time of making these investments.
38. With regards to the purported sale of gold and silver utensils by accused Amita Puri, it is further argued by Ld. PP that no intimation was given by accused V.K. Puri to his department regarding the cash in the amount of Rs. 87,10,259 approximately received by his wife from the said sale of gold/silver even though he had been sending intimations regularly to his department as and when he acquired any movable/immovable property or disposed off any such asset. He argued that such conduct of accused V.K. Puri also indicates that no such sale of gold/silver was ever made by his wife.
39. In order to support his submissions, the Ld. PP has placed reliance upon the following judgments:-
(i) N. Pasupathy Vs. State, Crl. Appeal No. 628 of 2014 decided by the Madras High Court on 02.02.2018.
(ii) C.S.D. Swami Vs. The State, 1960 AIR, 7 1960 SCR (1) 461 decided by Supreme Court of India on 21.05.1959.
(iii) Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Haryana, Crl. Appeal No. 1401 of 2008 decided by Supreme Court of India on 08.01.2015.
(iv) Umesh Kumar Vs. State of A.P. and Anr., Crl. Appeal No. 1304 of 2013 decided by Supreme Court on 06.09.2013.
(v) Saleem Alias Karia vs. State of U.P and Anr.,Crl. Rev. No. 2758 of 2011 decided by High Court of Allahabad on CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 44 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 22.07.2011.
(vi) Laxmibai (Dead) Thru Lr's & Anr. vs. Bhagwantbuva (Dead) Thru Lr's & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2058 of 2003 decided by Supreme Court of India on 29.01.2013.
(vii) State Bank of India vs. H. Satish Hosiery Factory and Anr., II(2004) BC 223 (Punjab & Haryana High Court).
(viii) Harpal Singh And Anr. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1981 SC 361.
(ix) Paulmeli & Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Crl. Appeal No. 1636 of 2011 decided by Supreme Court of India on 23.05.2014.
(x) P.S. Kirupanandhan Vs. State, Crl. Appeal No. 381 of 2017 decided by Madras High Court on 14.07.2017.
(xi) M/s LGF Sysmac (India) Private Ltd. vs. M/s Shalimar Engineers, RFA No. 531/2018, decided by Delhi High Court on 06.02.2019.
(xii) P. Nallammal Vs. State, decided by Supreme Court of India on 09.08.1999.
(xiii) Mr. Akila Ramachandra Prasad Vs. State, Crl. A. (MD) No. 372 of 2005 decided by Madras High Court on 05.06.2015.
(xiv) Anup Singh Dahiya Vs. State, Crl. No. 285/2007, decided by Delhi High Court on 30.09.2016.
Analysis Of The Evidence Led By The Parties And Discussion On The Rival Submissions Made On Behalf Of The Parties.
40. First of all, this court finds it proper to deal with the submissions of the Ld. Defence Counsels on various legal aspects.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 45 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Registration Of FIR Without Holding Preliminary Enquiry
41. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that the registration of FIR straightaway without conducting any preliminary enquiry is impermissible and in violation of the CBI Manual. He pointed out that the FIR in this case was registered on 22.02.2002 on the basis of a "Source Information" but the said source has nowhere been discussed in the chargesheet or during the trial of the case which makes the FIR itself as doubtful document and hence, the entire investigation gets vitiated. It was submitted by the Ld. Counsel that in the absence of any specific complaint, it was incumbent upon CBI to have conducted a suitable preliminary enquiry to enquire into the allegations made against the public servant, before lodging the FIR. In this regard, reliance was placed upon the two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as P. Sirajuddin Vs. State of Madras & Ors. AIR 1971 SC 520 and Ashok Tshering Bhutia Vs. State of Sikkim, (2011) 4 SCC 402. The Ld. Counsel contended that non holding of preliminary enquiry is in violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in above noted two judgments and exhibits malafides on the part of the CBI to frame the accused in a false and frivolous case.
42. Ld. Counsel for the accused has failed to point out any specific provision in the CBI Manual which makes it mandatory for CBI to conduct preliminary enquiry in all cases before proceeding to register the FIR. Chapter IX of the Manual relates to the preliminary enquiries and perusal of the same would make it amply clear that it is not a sine qua non in all cases. Paragraph 9.1 of the said Chapter is very material in this regard as it categorizes the cases in which preliminary CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 46 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. enquiry has to be resorted to. The said paragraph reads as under:-
"When, a complaint is received or information is available which may, after verification as enjoined in this Manual, indicate serious misconduct on the part of a public servant but is not adequate to justify registration of a regular case under the provisions of Section 154 Cr. PC., a Preliminary Enquiry may be registered after obtaining approval of the Competent Authority. Sometimes the High Courts and Supreme Court also entrust matter to Central Bureau of Investigation for enquiry and submission of report. In such situations also which may be rare, a 'Preliminary Enquiry' may be registered after obtaining orders from the Head Office. When the verification of a complaint and source information reveals commission of a prima facie cognizable offence, a Regular Case is to be registered as is enjoined by law. A PE may be converted into RC as soon as sufficient material becomes available to show that prima facie there has been commission of a cognizable offence. When information available is adequate to indicate commission of cognizable offence or its discreet verification leads to similar conclusion, a Regular Case must be registered instead of a Preliminary Enquiry. It is, therefore, necessary that the SP must carefully analyse material available at the time of evaluating the verification report submitted by Verifying Officer so the registration of PE is not resorted to where a Regular Case can be registered. Where material or information available clearly indicates that it would be a case of misconduct and not criminal misconduct, it would be appropriate that the matter is referred to the department at the stage itself by sending a self- contained note. In such cases, no 'Preliminary Enquiry' should be registered. In cases, involving bank and commercial frauds, a reference may be made to the Advisory Board for Banking, Commercial & Financial Frauds for advice before taking up a PE in case it is felt necessary to obtain such advice."CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 47 of 197
43. It is clear from the perusal of the aforesaid paragraph that a preliminary enquiry is to be resorted to only when the complaint or the information received by CBI indicates serious misconduct on the part of the public servant but is not adequate to justify registration of a regular case. However, when information available is sufficient to indicate commission of cognizable offence or its discrete verification leads to similar conclusion, regular case must be registered instead of a preliminary enquiry.
44. In P. Sirajuddin (Supra), the Apex Court while dealing with the case under the Prevention of Corruption Act has observed as follows:-
"17. In our view the procedure adopted against the appellant before the laying of the first information report though not in terms forbidden by law, was so unprecedented and outrageous as to shock one's sense of justice and fairplay. No doubt when allegations about dishonesty of a person of the appellant's rank were brought to the notice of the Chief Minister it was his duty to direct an enquiry into the matter. The Chief Minister in our view pursued the right course. The High Court was not impressed by the allegation of the appellant that the Chief Minister was moved to take an initiative at the instance of a person who was going to benefit by the retirement of the appellant and who was said to be a relation of the Chief Minister. The High Court rightly held that the relationship between the said person and the Chief Minister, if any, was so distance that it could not possibly have influenced him and we are of the same view. Before a public servant, whatever be his status, is publicly charged with acts of dishonest which amount to serious misdemeanor or misconduct of the type alleged in this case and a first information is lodged against him, there must be some suitable preliminary enquiry into the allegations by a responsible officer. The lodging of such a report against a person, specially one who like the appellant occupied the top position in a department, CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 48 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. even if baseless, would do incalculable harm not only to the officer in particular but to the department he belonged to, in general. If the Government had set up a Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department as was done in the State of Madras and the said department was entrusted with enquiries of this kind, no exception can be taken to an enquiry by officers of this department but any such enquiry must proceed in a fair and reasonable manner. The enquiry officer must not act under any preconceived idea of guilt of the person whose conduct was being enquired into or pursue the enquiry in such a manner as to lead to an inference that he was bent upon securing the conviction of the said person by adopting measures which are doubtful validity or sanction. The means adopted no less than the end to be achieved must be impeccable. In ordinary departmental proceedings against a Government Servant charged with delinquency, the normal practice before the issue of a charge-sheet is for someone in authority to take down statements of persons involved in the matter and to examine documents which have a bearing on the issue involved. It is only thereafter that a charge-sheet is submitted and a full-scale enquiry is launched. When the enquiry is to be held for the purpose of finding out whether criminal proceedings are to be resorted to the scope thereof must be limited to the examination of persons who have knowledge of the affairs of the delinquent officer and documents bearing on the same to find out whether there is prima facie evidence of guilt of the officer. Thereafter the ordinary law of the land must take its course and further inquiry be proceeded within terms of the Code of Criminal Procedure by lodging a first information report."
45. In Ashok Tshering Bhutia (Supra), the Apex Court has held as follows:-
"6. This Court in P. Sirajuddin etc. v. The State of Madras etc, AIR 1971 SC 520; and State of Haryana & Ors. v. Ch. Bhajan lal & Ors., CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 49 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. AIR1992 SC 604 :(1992 AIR SCW 237) has categorically held that before a public servant is charged with an act of dishonesty which amounts to serious mis-demeanor and an FiR is lodged against him, there must be some suitable preliminary enquiry into the allegations by a responsible officer. Such a course has not been adopted by the prosecution though the law declared by this Court is binding on everyone in view of the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution, which would by all means override the statutory provisions of the Cr. P.C. and such an irregularity is not curable nor does it fall within the ambit of Section 465 Cr. PC. However, as the issue is being raised first time before this Court, it is not worth further consideration. More so, the aforesaid observations do not lay down law of universal application."
46. A Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's Case (2014) 2 SCC 1 endorsed the ratio in P. Sirajuddin Case and held that the cases of corruption are ordinarily an exception to the mandatory rule of immediate registration of FIR. Following guidelines were laid down by the Hon'ble Court in Paragraph No. 111 of its report in the said case:-
"111. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold:
i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.
ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.
Iii) If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 50 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.
iv) The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.
v) The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.
vi) As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is to be conducted will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The category of cases in which preliminary inquiry may be made are as under:
a) Matrimonial disputes/family disputes
b) Commercial offences
c) Medical negligence cases
d) Corruption cases
e) Cases where there is abnormal delay/latches in initiating criminal prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay in reporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining the reasons for delay.
The aforesaid are only illustrations and not exhaustive of all conditions which may warrant preliminary enquiry.
vii) While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time bound and in any case it should not exceed 7 days. The fact of such delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry. Viii) Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is the record of all information received in a police station, we direct that all information relating to cognizable offence, whether resulting in registration of FIR or leading to an inquiry, must be mandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said Diary and the decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also be reflected, as mentioned above."
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 51 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. The Bench, therefore, held that the necessity to hold preliminary inquiry would depend upon the facts of each case.
47. In corruption cases, preliminary enquiry may be resorted to prior to registration of FIR in appropriate cases particularly when facts are either incomplete or hazy so that the public servant is not unfairly harassed adversely effecting his morale in particular and the cadre in general. However, neither in P. Sirajuddin's Case nor in Lalita Kumari's case has the Apex Court laid down any inflexible rule of law that the registration of FIR straightaway in corruption cases without resorting to preliminary enquiry would vitiate the ensuing prosecution. In Lalita Kumari's Case also, the expression used in Clause (vi) of Paragraph No. 111 is "may" and not "shall" clearly making it evident that even in those categories of cases including corruption cases, discretion is vested with the investigating agency whether or not to conduct a preliminary enquiry prior to registration of FIR.
48. Having regard to the above discussion, this court is of the view that holding of preliminary enquiry in all corruption cases is not mandatory and when the source information is found by CBI to be credible and reliable disclosing commission of cognizable offence, it can directly register FIR without holding preliminary enquiry. In the instant case, the CBI has found the source information to be credible, adequate and reliable and therefore, it did not commit any illegality by not holding a preliminary enquiry before registering a regular case. The act of CBI in directly registering the FIR is in consonance with Chapter (ix) of the CBI Manual and the same cannot be assailed.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 52 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Authorization Under Sections 17 & 18 of the PC Act
49. It was argued by Ld. Counsel for the accused that the Investigating Officer (PW154), has conducted investigation without any authorization under Section 17 of the PC Act and therefore, the entire investigation has been illegal. He also submitted that all the CBI Officials including the Investigating Officer (PW154), have collected documentary evidence in this case unauthorizedly and illegally as none of them was having any written authorization from the concerned SP to inspect the records of various banks/private financial institutions and to obtain certified copies of the records from there. It is his submission that in the absence of any such authorization, the documents collected by these officials cannot be read in evidence and therefore trial stands vitiated. In this regard, the ld. Counsel placed heavy reliance upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as State Inspector of Police Vishakhapatnam Vs. Surya Sankaram Karri (2006) 7 SCC 172, wherein it was held as under:-
"13. Provisions of the 1988 Act, no doubt, like the 1947 Act seek to protect public servant from a vexatious prosecution. Section 17 provides for investigation by a person authorized in this behalf. The said provision contains a non obstante clause. It makes investigation only by police officers of the ranks specified therein to be imperative in character. The second proviso appended to Section 17 of the Act provides that an offence referred to in clause
(e) of sub-section (1) of Section 13, shall not be investigated without the order of a police officer not below the rank of a Superintendent of Police. Authorization by a Superintendent of Police in favour of an officer so as to enable him to carry out investigation in terms of Section 17 of the Act is a statutory one.
The power to grant such sanction has been conferred upon the authorities not below the rank of a Superintendent of Police. The proviso uses a negative expression. It also uses the expression CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 53 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. "shall". Ex facie it is mandatory in character." .......................................................................................... ........................................................................................... ..........................................................................................
"16. The approach of the Learned Special Judge, to say the least, was not correct. When a statutory functionary passes an order, that too authorizing a person to carry out a public function like investigation into an offence, an order in writing was required to be passed. A statutory functionary must act in a manner laid down in the statute. Issuance of an oral direction is not contemplated under the Act. Such a concept is unknown in administrative law. The statutory functionaries are enjoined with a duty to pass written orders."
50. It may be noted here that in a subsequent judgment in Ashok Tshering Bhutia's Case of year 2011 (Supra), the Supreme Court held the above noted Judgment in Surya Sankaram Karri Case to be per incuriam as it had been rendered without taking a note of an earlier judgment on the very same issue reported as Kalpanath Rai Vs. State (1997) 8 SCC 732, wherein it was held that oral approval obtained from the concerned competent officer would suffice and was sufficient to legalize the further action.
51. In the instant case, PW154 has very clearly deposed that he had been authorized to investigate this case vide order dt. 20.02.2002 of the then SP CBI under Section 17 of the PC Act. He proved the said order as Ex. PW-154/C. So far as the issue of authorization under Section 18 of the PC Act is concerned, it has been deposed by PW154 that it was the then SP CBI who was writing letters to the banks and the private companies to provide the relevant records and he as well as the other CBI officials used to only collect the record CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 54 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. from these banks/companies. It is evident from the perusal of the record that letters to all the banks and private companies have been written by the then SP CBI, asking them to provide the relevant records. It is, therefore, clear that it was the SP CBI who was communicating with the banks/private companies and PW154 as well as the other CBI Officials only used to receive/collect those documents on behalf of the SP. Hence, they were not required to have any authorization u/s 18 of the PC Act for the reason that they have not themselves inspected the record of any bank or private company. Here, it would also be apposite to refer to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Prakash P. Induja & Another (2003) 6 SCC 195 to the effect that illegality committed in the course of investigation does not effect the competence and jurisdiction of the court for trial unless the illegality in the investigation can be shown to have caused miscarriage of justice. The Ld. Counsel for the accused has failed to show that any miscarriage of justice has been caused to the accused by the acts of the investigating officer or any other CBI Official which was done in the absence of any authorization under Section u/s 17 or Section 18 of the PC Act.
52. Hence, no force is found in the submissions of the Ld. Defence Counsel on this issue also.
Clubbing Of The Income Of The Two Accused
53. The reasons for clubbing of income, expenditure and assets of accused V.K. Puri with those of his wife i.e. accused Amita Puri are very much clear from the perusal of the chargesheet itself and the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 55 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. nature of movable assets found to be in their names at the end of the check period. It has been shown in the charts annexed to the chargesheet that enormous investments had been made during the check period in the name of accused Amita Puri by way of Fixed Deposit Receipts, Term Deposits, Bonds, Shares etc. It was further found during the course of investigation that accused Amita Puri had worked as a Teacher for merely three years and had earned less than Rs. 50,000/- as salary. She had also come forward to explain these movable assets in her name by producing various bills showing purported sale of gold jewellery and silver utensils by her to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore. Since those bills were found to be forged during the course of investigation, it was held by the Investigating Officer that the investments made in her name during the check period were from the tainted money gained by accused V.K. Puri. Hence, it was rightly argued by Ld. PP that the financial figures of accused V.K. Puri and his wife i.e. accused Amita Puri were intricately connected with each other in such a manner that it was not possible to distinguish the same. Merely because they both used to file separate income tax returns in respect of their respective incomes, it does not give rise to an inference that in calculating the disproportionate assets of accused V.K. Puri, the assets held in the name of his wife Amita Puri cannot be considered.
Change In The Duration of Check Period
54. It has been explained in the chargesheet itself that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that there had been extra ordinary spurt in the accumulation of assets by V.K. Puri since 01.06.1988 after his posting at Indore as Dy. Collector/Assistant CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 56 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Commissioner of Central Excise and hence the said date was taken as the date for start of check period whereas the date of search i.e 20.02.2002 has been taken as the date of end of the check period. So, nothing malafide or fishy can be found in the change in duration of the check period.
55. Now, let me proceed to the factual and evidentiary aspects of the case.
56. Accused Vijay Kumar Puri is alleged to have accumulated assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs. 1,30,70,863.61 during the period 01.06.1988 to 22.02.2002 and is facing charges for the offence punishable U/s 13 (2) r/w Section 13 (1)
(e) of the P.C. Act, 1988. His wife i.e. Amita Puri is alleged to have abetted him in commission of the offence and thus has been charged with the offence punishable U/s 109 IPC r/w Sections 13 (2) and 13 (1) (e) of P.C. Act 1988. Both the accused are also facing charge of criminal conspiracy U/s 120B r/w Section 193 IPC for having obtained false bills from Vinesh Vyas of different dates and in different amounts aggregating to Rs. 87,10,259/- purported to be against gold jewellery and silver utensils.
57. The ingredients of the offence of criminal misconduct envisaged U/s 13 (1) (e) of P.C. Act, 1988 are :-
(i) The public servant is found in possession of pecuniary resources or assets disproportionate to his known sources of income; and
(ii) The public servant is unable to satisfactorily account for CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 57 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. these resources or assets.
58. In order to substantiate the charge U/s 13 (1) (e) of the P.C. Act, 1988, the prosecution must prove :-
(i) The nature and extent of the pecuniary resources or assets found in the possession of the public servant during the check period;
(ii) Known Sources of income of the public servant i.e. the sources that are known to prosecution and ;
(iii) The resources or the assets found in possession of the accused/public servant are disproportionate to his known sources of income.
59. In case, the prosecution is successful in establishing the above noted facts, the ingredients of the offence U/s 13 (1) (e) of PC Act stands established and the offence of criminal misconduct gets proved against the accused public servant unless he is able to account for these resources/assets to the satisfaction of the court.
60. In the instant case, accused V.K. Puri was admittedly a Public Servant during the check period. The accused have also not disputed the nature and the value of assets held by Vijay Kumar Puri at the start of the check period i.e. as on 01.06.1988, as reproduced in Para No. 5 hereinabove. This has thus remained undisputed that accused Vijay Kumar Puri was holding assets (both movable as well as immovable) to the tune of Rs. 1,80,373.20 at the start of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 58 of 19761. However, the nature, extent and value of the assets found in the possession of the accused at the end of the check period i.e. as on 22.02.2002 as well as the income earned by them during the check period and the expenditure incurred by them during that period as stated in the chargesheet is vehemently disputed on behalf of the accused. A detailed discussion is required on these three heads separately.
Discussion On The Income Of The Accused During The Check Period (A) As regards the income of accused V.K. Puri
62. According to the prosecution, the total income earned by both the accused during the check period was in the amount of Rs. 42,41,557.75 as reflected from the table in Para No. 13 of the chargesheet, which has been reproduced in Para No. 5 at Page Nos. 5 & 6 hereinabove. For the sake of convenience, I find it proper to reproduce the said table here under also :-
Income during the check period:-
1. Income from salary : Rs. 11,65,255.00
2. Income from interest as reflected in returns : Rs. 2,64,181.89
3. Income of wife from salary : Rs. 48,617.80
4. Income of wife from other sources : Rs. 17,94,348.50
5. House Building Advance : Rs. 2,22,500.00
6. GPF Advance : Rs. 1,64,400.00
7. Rent from Dehradun House : Rs. 3,86,598.00
8. Rent from Delhi Flat : Rs. 54,000.00
9. LIC Maturity Claim : Rs. 37,157.00
10. Sale of articles : Rs. 6,500.00
11. Gifts received from relatives etc. : Rs. 98,000.00 Total : Rs. 42,41,557.75 Income during the period of check :Rs. 42,41,557.75 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 59 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
63. It was argued by Ld. Public Prosecutor that income of the two accused Vijay Kumar Puri and Amita Puri from all sources during the check period was Rs. 42,41,557,.75. He submitted that no source of income of the accused other than those mentioned in the aforesaid table came to the light during the course of the investigation and the accused have also failed to demonstrate that they had earned income from any other sources also during this period. He would submit that income of the accused from all the known and legal sources has been taken into account. On the other hand, Ld. Defence Counsel argued that the prosecution has not only deflated the income of the accused from various known sources but also has concealed income earned by them from other genuine sources during the check period. According to the Ld. Counsel, the income of the accused Vijay Kumar Puri alone was Rs.
38,04,709.8 during the check period.
64. The Ld. Counsel for the accused pointed out that the accused Vijay Kumar Puri had received his salary of Rs. 3866/- for the month of May, 1988 on 31.05.1988 by Cheque which got encashed in the month of June, 1998 and thus was credited to his account and was available to him in June, 1988 which is evident from his salary account Ex. PW-154/E (Colly.). It is clear that this amount has not been considered by the prosecution. Even though, this amount represents the salary of accused Vijay Kumar Puri for the month of May, 1988 yet it cannot be gainsaid that it was credited to his account in June, 1988 and thus formed part and parcel of his income during the check period. Therefore, this amount of Rs. 3866/- ought to have been CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 60 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. added to his income during the check period. The Ld. Counsel for the accused also argued that when accused Vijay Kumar Puri was relieved from his post in Delhi on 31.05.1988, he had received an advance of Rs. 3950/-, which amount also has not been accounted for. However, it is found that this advance of Rs. 3950 had been adjusted from the salary of the accused for the months of July, August and September and only the net salary paid to the accused for these three months after such adjustment has been taken into account while calculating his income during the check period. The Ld. PP was unable to explain as to why these two amounts of Rs. 3,866/- and Rs. 3,950/- were not added to the income of the accused V.K. Puri during the check period. Therefore, in the opinion of this court, these two amounts of Rs. 3,866/- and Rs. 3,950/- have to be added to the income of the accused V.K. Puri during the check period.
65. It is further argued by Ld. Counsel for the accused that the interest amount of Rs. 664.4 earned by the accused on the two FDs in Canara Bank which got matured on 03.06.1988 has not been considered. In this regard, he has referred to the original Passbook of accused Vijay Kumar Puri issued by Canara Bank, Gole Market, New Delhi, Ex. DW-10/Z-52 to show that the maturity amount of Rs. 17,275.10 has been credited to his account on 03.06.1988 which includes the interest amount of Rs. 664.4 in addition to the principal amount of the FDs Rs. 16,610.70. It is thus contended that te aforesaid interest amount of Rs. 664.4 needs to be added to the income of the accused during check period. The Ld. PP was unable to explain why the sum of Rs. 664.4 has not been added to the income of accused V.K. Puri during the check period. Hence, in the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 61 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. opinion of this court, the sum of Rs. 664.4 shall have to be added to the income of accused V.K. Puri during the check period.
66. The Ld. Counsel for the accused has further argued that the prosecution has taken into account the rent received by accused Vijay Kumar Puri from his Dehradun House only in the sum of Rs. 3,86,598/-, whereas the total rent received by him for the said house was Rs. 8,46,935/- as he had let out the same at a monthly rent of Rs. 7000/- w.e.f. 01.10.1993 and the rent was increased from time to time and lastly was Rs. 11,000/- per month at the end of the check period. In this regard, he has referred to various intimations given by accused Vijay Kumar Puri to his department relating to the letting out of the aforesaid house and the monthly rent received by him which are Ex. PW-127/E, Ex. PW-154/D(Colly.) and Ex. PW-154/E(Colly.). Similarly, as regards the flat of accused Vijay Kumar Puri at Delhi also, it is argued that the rental income taken into account by the prosecution is only Rs. 54,000/- whereas the accused had let out the same to a company M/s Duncans Industries Limited vide lease agreement dt. 30.07.2001 Ex. P-27 at the monthly rent of Rs. 9000/- and received a total sum of Rs.90,000/- from the said tenant as rent till February, 2002. Ld. PP was unable to explain as to why monthly rental earned by accused V.K. Puri from his aforesaid two immovable properties at Dehradun and at Delhi have been shown very less as compared to the actual rental received by him which is depicted by the documents filed by the prosecution itself alongwith the chargesheet as noted hereinabove. Therefore, the rental received by accused V.K. Puri from his house at Dehradun during the check period shall have to be taken as Rs. 8,46,935/- and the rental received by him from his flat at Delhi CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 62 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. during the check period shall have to be taken as Rs. 90,000/- which would add a sum of Rs. 4,60,337/- & Rs. 36,000/- (Total Rs. 4,96,337/-) to his income during the check period.
67. Ld. Defence Counsel also argued that the value of the gifts received by accused Vijay Kumar Puri from his father has also been shown less i.e. only in the sum of Rs. 98,000/-, whereas he had received Rs. 1,96,000/- as gift from his father. To support his submissions, Ld. Counsel has placed reliance upon various communications sent in this regard by Vijay Kumar Puri to his department which are part of Ex. PW-154/D (Colly.). There is no explanation from the prosecution as to why the documents collected in this regard during the course of investigation have been ignored and why the amount of gifts received by accused V.K. Puri from his father have been shown at lower side. Therefore, it is to be taken that the accused V.K. Puri had received a sum of Rs. 1,96,000/- from his father as gift during the check period and an amount of Rs. 98,000/- has to be added to his income during the check period.
68. It was also argued by Ld. Counsel that the money received by accused Vijay Kumar Puri from sale of his Scooter bearing registration No. DHT 9482 and Washing Machine to the tune of Rs. 4500/- and 3000/- respectively has also been ignored by the prosecution in computing the income of the accused during the check period. Intimation sent in this regard by the accused to his department have been relied upon to show this income. Ld. PP was unable to refute these submissions of the Ld. Defence Counsel. Documents filed on record by the prosecution itself show that due intimations have been CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 63 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. sent by accused V.K. Puri with regards to the aforesaid sale of his scooter and washing machine during the check period. Hence, this court is of the opinion that these two sums of Rs. 4,500/- & Rs. 3,000/- shall have to be added to the income of accused V.K. Puri during the check period.
69. The Ld. Counsel further argued that the accused Vijay Kumar Puri had received a sum of Rs. 3,28,400/- in total as GPF advance on various dates during the check period but the prosecution has taken into account only a sum of Rs. 1,64,000/- under this head. In this regard also, reliance has been placed upon the correspondences exchanged between accused Vijay Kumar Puri and his department. Documents filed alongwith the chargesheet which form part of Ex. PW-154/D (Colly.) make it manifest that the accused V.K. Puri had withdrawn a total sum of Rs. 3,28,400/- from his G.P. Fund during the check period on four different occasions (Rs. 15,000/- on 30.01.1989, Rs. 1,17,000/- on 02.07.1990, Rs. 1,64,000/- in March, 1993 and Rs. 32,400/- in December, 1996). It appears that the investigating officer has failed to take into account the GPF withdrawals of accused V.K. Puri in January 1989, July 1990 and December 1996. Ld. PP was unable to explain why these withdrawals have not been considered despite there being documents on record in support thereof. Therefore, the total amount of GPF withdrawals by accused V.K. Puri during the check period has to be taken as Rs. 3,28,400/- in place of Rs. 1,64,000/- as mentioned in the chargesheet which would add a further sum of Rs. 1,64,400/- to his income.
70. It is further contended by the Ld. Counsel that the following CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 64 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. income received by accused Vijay Kumar Puri during the check period has not been considered at all by the prosecution :-
(i) Amount received of family settlement= Rs. 4,25,000/-
(ii) Amount of DA received as being a
Liaison Officer for Kailash Mansarovar
Yatra and as being a Delegate in
Indian Embassy on official visit to
Kathmandu = Rs. 66784.12
(iii) Interest income from MEP-91 and
MEP-92 and honorarium in the sum
of Rs. 2000/- = Rs. 6985/-
(iv) Income from NSC, NSS and Postal
Insurance = Rs.33,810/-
(v) Income from Capital Gains as
reflected in the Income Tax Returns
of the accused Vijay Kumar Puri = Rs.71,093/-
(vi) Interest Income received from his
deposits in Saving Bank Account = Rs.16,802.37
(vii) Income/Dividend from Shares of
HDFC Ltd = Rs.7,325/-
71. In view of the documents and evidence on record, the Ld. PP was unable to dispute the amounts mentioned against serial numbers
(ii) to (vii) hereinabove to be included in the income of accused V.K. Puri during the check period. However, he has vehemently disputed that there had been any settlement between accused V.K. Puri and his brothers and sisters or that he had received the amount of Rs.
4,25,000/- as per the said purported settlement as mentioned against serial number (i) hereinabove.
72. Ld. Counsel for the accused submits that a copy of the Family Settlement Deed dt. 13.11.1999 was duly supplied to the Investigating Officer by Sh. Y.K. Puri, the elder brother of accused V.K. Puri during the course of the investigation but the same has been malafidely CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 65 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. ignored by him. The Ld. Counsel has also drawn my attention to intimations given by accused V.K. Puri to his department with regards to the payments received by him from his brother Y.K. Puri under the said settlement from 03.04.2000 to 10.07.2001. Ld. PP argued that the said settlement deed is a sham and farce document which has been manipulated by the accused in order to shield himself in this case and therefore, the Investigating Officer has rightly not taken the same into account.
73. Sh. Y.K. Puri, appearing as DW-5 has idenfied his signatures at Point A and that of his two brothers namely Mahender Puri & V.K. Puri at Points B & C as well as that of his two sisters Sushmita & Usha at Points D & E on the aforesaid copy of the Family Settlement which is on record and has been filed alongwith the chargesheet. The same has been marked as Ex. A-65 during the admission/denial of documents. He has further deposed that they prepared the settlement mutually in the year 1999 and he had sent the original Settlement Deed to CBI through his friend Prabhu Dandriyal. He also deposed that in terms of the said settlement he has paid Rs. 4,25,000/- to accused V.K. puri between the years 1999 & 2001 in cash in about 7-8 trenches. In the cross-examination he has denied the suggestion that the said family settlement is a forged document which has been fabricated for the purposes of this case.
74. The investigating officer (PW-154) has admitted in his cross examination that he had received a letter dt. 08.11.2002 which forms part of Ex. PW-154/Z-68. This document is the letter by Sh. P.D. Dandriyal (to whom DW5 has made reference in his testimony as CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 66 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. stated hereinabove) addressed to Sh. Suman Kumar (IO of this case) enclosing therewith the Family Settlement, Will, Bank Accounts Sheets & I.T. Certificates (Total 39 Pages). PW-154 has admitted that 39 pages had been enclosed with this letter but he has filed only three of those pages alongwith the chargesheet. It is thus evident that the original Settlement Deed had been supplied to the investigating officer by DW5 through his friend Sh. P.D. Dandriyal. Regular intimations have been given by the accused V.K. Puri to his department with regards to the total amount of Rs. 4,25,000/- purportedly received by him from his brother Y.K. Puri under the said settlement. These documents do indicate that accused V.K. Puri has received the said amount from his brother in several trenches. However, the story appears to be otherwise. Perusal of the testimony of PW21 and the documents proved by him Ex. PW-21/F1 to to Ex. PW-21/F-24 make it evident that accused V.K. Puri got demand drafts in the amounts of Rs. 33,000/-, Rs. 35,000/-, Rs. 31,000/- and so on, prepared in Bank of Maharashtra, Dehradun Branch, by issuing cheques drawn on his account No. 1328 and on the account of his wife Amita Puri bearing No. 984 maintained in the same branch, which demand drafts were payable at Pune and then he deposited these demand drafts in his bank account in Pune. Vide the aforesaid intimations given to his department, he cleverly represented that he had received these sums of money from his brother Y.K. Puri under a family settlement. It was sought to be argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that V.K. Puri had received these amounts in cash and instead of carrying the cash to Pune, he thought of depositing the same in his account in Dehradun and then carried the demand drafts to Pune safely. I feel unable to countenance these contentions. Perusal of the documents Ex. PW-
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 67 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 21/F1 to Ex. PW-21/F24 would show that the very first demand draft for Rs. 33,000/- was prepared vide application Ex. PW-21/F on the basis of cheques issued by Amita Puri from his account No. 984. Who had deposited this sum of money in her account and why? No answer has comeforth. Further, it is also evident from deposition of PW21 that Y.K. Puri also has an account No. 1418 in the same branch of the Bank. Thus, if he had to pay any money to V.K. Puri under any settlement and V.K. Puri wanted the same by way of demand drafts, the natural and normal course would have been that Y.K. Puri got the demand drafts issued in the name of V.K. Puri by issuing cheques from his own account in the Bank. There is no explanation as why such course was not followed.
75. Hence, the accused V.K. Puri appears to have concocted a false story of having received Rs. 4,25,000/- from his brother under a family settlement. Mere fact that there is a settlement document on record and intimations also were given by V.K. puri to his department in this regard, is not sufficient to prove that Y.K. Puri had paid a sum of money to V.K. Puri. The truth is something else. These amounts of money belonged to V.K. Puri himself as he has got prepared demand drafts by issuing cheques from his own account and that of his wife Amita Puri, which drafts he then deposited in his account in Pune. It was done mischievously and malafidely to represent that he had received this money from his brother Y.K. Puri. In depth investigations have revealed the truth and exposed the dubious acts of the accused. Therefore, this amount of Rs. 4,25,000/- cannot be regarded as income of accused V.K. Puri. It appears to be his ill gotten money which he had parked in his bank account in Dehradun and he CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 68 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. succeeded in passing off the same as genuine money to his department.
76. In view of the same, only a sum of Rs. 2,02,799.49 shall have to be added to the income of accused V.K. Puri [i.e. the sum of amounts mentioned in serial nos. (ii) to (vii) of the table reproduced in paragraph no. 70 hereinabove].
77. I may note here that the prosecution has shown a sum of Rs. 2,22,500/- (received by the accused V.K. Puri as House Building Advance from his department) also as his income during the check period. This court wonders as how this amount has been considered as his income when it was only an advance (akin to Loan) taken by the accused from his department and was repayable. Accused V.K. Puri as well as his counsel admitted that this advance amount was repayable and was in fact repaid by the accused duly as per the repayment schedule fixed by the department. Therefore, this amount has to be subtracted from the income of the accused V.K. Puri during the check period.
78. Thus a total sum of Rs.7,55,016.89 (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Sixteen and Eighty Nine Paise) shall have to be added to the income of accused V.K. Puri during the check period. This would take his total income from all sources during the check period (excluding the income earned by his wife i.e. accused Amita Puri) to Rs. 31,53,608.78 (Rupees Thirty One Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand Six Hundred Eight and Seventy Eight Paise).
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 69 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. (B) As regards the income of accused Amita Puri.
79. According to the prosecution, the income earned by accused Amita Puri during the check period as reflected against Serial Nos. 3 and 4 in the table reproduced in Para No. 62 hereinabove was Rs. 48,617.80 from salary and Rs. 17,94,348.50 from other sources. However, these "Other Sources" have nowhere been explained in the chargesheet. The investigating officer has not referred to any of the sources in his testimony as PW-154. However, it was explained by the Ld. PP and the investigating officer during the course of arguments that this sum of Rs. 17,94,348.50 is the income of Amita Puri from sources other than salary i.e. income from investments, tuition etc as reflected in her income tax returns.
80. In the chart/table produced by the Ld. Defence Counsel, the income of accused Amita Puri during the check period from all sources including the salary, tuitions, interest on investments, sale of gold jewellery/silver articles has been shown as Rs. 1,63,56,036/-. It was contended by the Ld. Counsel that in the initial income tax returns filed by accused Amita Puri for the assessment years 1994-1995, 1995- 1996 and 1996-1997 (Ex. DW-10/A to Ex. DW-10/C), she had only shown the earnings from her salary as a teacher and had not shown the interest received by her on the investments made by her. It would be apposite to reproduce here the chart of the income stated to have been earned by accused Amita Puri during the check period, as submitted by Ld. Counsel :-
S. No. Period Details Amount Supporting Documents Taxable income as per enclosed copy of FY 1993-94 IT Return D-406 Ex.
1. IT return (Taxable Income same as 58,000 AY 1994-95 DW10/A actual income)
2. FY 1994-95 Taxable income as per enclosed copy of 47,500 IT Return D-406 Ex.CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 70 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. IT return (Taxable Income same as AY 1995-96 DW10/B actual income) Taxable income of Rs. 87,028/- as per enclosed copy of IT return. Taxable income includes Rs. 8,507/- as salary offered to tax and which has been worked out after availing standard FY 1995-96 IT Return D-406 Ex.
3. deduction @ 33.33% on salary amount 91,303 AY 1996/97 P-31 (D-377) of Rs. 12,783.40 (D-377). Actual income is Rs. 87,028/- + Rs. 4,275/- = Rs. 91,289/- . Kindly also refer to statement of V.K. Puri date 04.01.2019, page 2 Taxable Income of Rs. 15,00,197/-
offered to tax, which is net income after Original return is under deduction of expenses, and after D-147 (Ex. PW154/M) availing deduction under section 80 L whereas Revised IT and also after availing standard Return is under D-670 FY 1996-97 deduction @33.33% on salary amount
4. 15,06,242 (Ex. PW-150/B AY 1997-98 of Rs. 15,600/-, Rs. 846/- is deduction (Colly.); and IT U/s 80L and Rs. 5,199/- is the standard assessment order deduction taken on salary. Thus the dated 12.01.2010 is actual income received is Rs. 15,00,197 Ex. DW10/F. + Rs. 846/- + Rs. 5,199/- = Rs.
15,06,242/-
Taxable Income of Rs. 5,82,297/-
offered to tax, which is net income after deduction of expenses, and after Original return is under availing deduction under section 80 L D-147 (Ex. PW154/M) and also after availing standard whereas Revised IT FY 1997-98 deduction @33.33% on salary amount Return is D-670 (Ex.
5. 5,90,614 AY 1998-99 of Rs. 18,202/-. Rs. 2,250/- is deduction PW-150/B; and IT U/s 80L and Rs. 6.067/- is the standard assessment order deduction taken on salary. Thus the dated 10.01.2010 is actual income received is Rs. 5,82,297 Ex. DW10/G. + Rs. 2,250/- + Rs. 6,067/- = Rs.
5,90,614/-
Taxable Income of Rs. 13,89,535/-
offered to tax, which is net income after deduction of expenses, and after Original return is D- availing deduction under section 80L 147 (Ex. PW154/M) and also after availing standard whereas Revised IT FY 1998-99 deduction @33.33% on salary amount Return is D-670 (Ex.
6. 14,03,885 AY 1999-00 of Rs. 7,050/-. Rs. 12,000/- is deduction PW-150/B); and IT U/s 80L and Rs. 2,350/- is the standard assessment order deduction taken on salary. Thus the dated 12.01.2010 is actual income received is Rs. Ex. DW10/I. 13,89,535+ Rs. 12,000/- + Rs. 2,350/- = Rs. 14,03,885/-
7. FY 1999-00 Taxable income of Rs. 20,74,445/- 20,98,253 Original return is D-
AY 2000-01 offered to tax, which is net income after 147 (Ex. PW154/M) deduction of expenses, and after whereas Revised IT availing deduction under section 80L Return is D-670 (Ex. and after offering capital gain on PW-150/B); and IT indexed gain. Rs. 12,000/- is deduction assessment order U/s 80L. Actual income from sale of dated 12.01.2010 is shares is Rs. 46,884, whereas applying Ex. DW10/K. indexation, capital gain offered to tax is CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 71 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Rs. 35,076. Thus the differential amount of income of Rs. 11,808/- is required to be added. Thus the actual income received is Rs. 20,74,445/- + Rs. 12,000/- + Rs. 11,808/- = Rs.
20,98,253/-
Taxable income of Rs. 13,56,033/-
offered to tax, which is net income after deduction of expenses, and after availing deduction under section 80L and after offering capital gain on Original return and indexed gain. Rs. 12,000/- is deduction revised IT Return are U/s 80L. Actual profit from sale of D-670 (Ex. PW150/B); FY 2000-01
8. shares is Rs. 11,297/-, whereas 13,79,097 and IT assessment AY 2001-02 applying indexation, capital gain offered order dated to tax is Rs. 231/-. Thus the differential 12.01.2010 is Ex. DW-
amount of income of Rs. 11,066/- is 10/N
required to be added. Thus the actual
income received is Rs. 13,56,031/- +
Rs. 12,000/- + Rs. 11,066/- = Rs.
13,79,097/-
Original IT Return
(Mark A), Revised
Return Ex. DW-10/P
FY 2001-02 As per supporting documents on the and IT assessment
9. 3,71,519
upto 22.2.02 basis of which IT Returns were filed. order dated
12.01.2010 is Ex.
DW10/Q. Various
supporting documents.
Deduction of Provident
Fund-Salary
Statement- D-377 (Ex.
P-31); Entries of
Refund of Provident Fund of Rs. 4,973/-
receipt of amounts in
10. 1998 and contributory Provident Fund of Rs. 10,903
SB A/c No. 16730 in
4,973/- alongwith interest
Union Bank, Napean
Sea Road, Mumbai
(Ex. DW10/Z19
(OSR));
Purchase of 50
debentures and sale of
30 debentures
therefrom. Allotment
of 100 shares in lieu of
11. 1992-01 Income/dividend from shares of L & T 9,970
20 debentures (D-606
Ex. PW154/Z127
(Colly.). Receipt of
dividend (Ex.
DW10/Z17)
12. 1994-2001 Income from Indian Railways Finance 1,30,279.5 Indian Railways Tax
Co. as per interest warrant is Rs. Free Bonds interest
18,198/- x 4 = Rs. 72,792/- Income from warrants Ex.
Tax Free Bonds of Konkan Railway is DW10/Z29 (Colly.).
Rs. 57,487.50 (as per enclosure). Total Konkan Railway
Tax Free income is Rs. 72,792/- + Rs. allotment letters
57,487.50 = Rs. 1,30,279.50 alongwith bonds and
interest warrant are
Ex. DW10/Z30 to Ex.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 72 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
DW10/Z33.
Pages 166 & 167 of D-
57 (Ex. PW154/D
Amount paid by I.S. Puri towards DDA
13. 1993-98 5,28,637.5 (colly.); page 7 of D-
Flat
58 (Ex. PW154/D
(Colly.))
Page 7 of D-58 (Ex.
PW154/D (Colly.); Ex.
DW10/Z35; Ex.
14. FY 1998 Amount received on demise of I.S. Puri 1,97,993.2
PW2/K-1; Ex. PW2/K2
and Pg. 8 of D-58, Ex.
PW154/D (Colly.)
Ex.DW10/Z20;
Ex.DW10/Z21;
Ex.DW10/Z22;
Ex.DW10/Z23;
Additional interest income from banks
15. FY 1995-96 77,997 Ex.DW10/X;
during FY 1995-96
Ex.DW10/W;
Ex.DW10/Y;
Ex.DW10/Z25;
Ex.DW10/Z26
Ex.DW10/Z40 to
Ex.DW10/Z44;
Additional interest income from
16. FY 1995-96 1,13,504 Ex.PW143/A (Colly.);
companies during FY 1995-96
Ex.DW10/Z45 (Colly.)
and Ex.DW10/Z46
Ex. DW10/C; Ex.
17. Income Tax refund 1,180 PW154/M & Ex.
PW150/B
Additional interest income from SBI
FY 94-95 & Ex. DW10/Z14 &
18. bonds during FY 1994-95, FY 1995-96 10,360 FY 95-96 Ex.DW10/Z15 and FY 2001-02
19. FY 1988-92 Income from tuition during FY 1988-89 2,88,540 During the said period, to FY 1991-92 and shares Amita Puri earned Rs.
2,00,000/- and Rs.
1,00,000/- from tutions
and shares
respectively. This is
proved from cross
examination of
PW109; pg.2 of
examination in chief of
Amita Puri (DW-9) dt.
2.11.18 and pg. 1-2 of
cross examination of
Amita Puri dt.
30.01.19, where
neither any question is
asked nor any
suggestion is given by
Ld. PP in this regard.
Note:Income from sale
of L & T debentures of
Rs. 11,460/- is already
taken at Serial number
11 above and thus is
subtracted from
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 73 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc.
income from shares
for the said period.
As per page 2 of
examination in chief of
DW-6 dated 30.08.18,
he and his parents
were giving about
20000-25000 pm to
Amita Puri in 80s.
Thus for the year 1988
Rs. 20000 has been
taken. He has said
that they were giving
Rs. 50000 in the 90s.
Thus for the period
FY 1988
Gift received from brother Dr. Sanjeev 1990-2001 i.e. 12
20. (June) to 7,30,000
Kumar and parents of Amita Puri years, Rs. 6,00,000
2002 (Feb)
has been taken. He
has also said that Rs.
100000 was paid to
Amita Puri after sale of
house at Amritsar in
1993 by her father.
Also see pages 5 & 6
of examination in chief
of DW9 dated
02.11.18 and page 3 &
4 of cross examination
of DW9 dated
30.01.2019.
D-405; DW-3, DW-4;
DW5 and Amita Puri
Net amount received on sale of gold
21. 67,10,259 (DW-9). Detailed
FY 1992-95 jewellery/silver articles
submissions are being
made separately.
1,63,56,036
81. The Ld. Defence Counsel argued that the interest income received by accused Amita Puri on the investments made by her during the check period were not offered for income tax payment for the reason that during 1990s there was a difference of opinion between the Bangalore Bench of ITAT and Cuttak Bench of ITAT, the former holding that the benefits accruing out of Stridhan are not taxable whereas the later holding otherwise. He would submit that it was in late 1999 that the Special Bench of ITAT decided such income to be taxable and accordingly accused V.K. Puri consulted his Chartered Accountant who advised him not to offer such interest CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 74 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. income of Amita Puri earned by her during all these years, for income tax payment as those would incur penalty and interest. He further submitted that accused V.K. Puri consulted another Chartered Accountant in the year 2002 who advised him to offer such interest income for the last 6 years for income tax payment and accordingly that chartered accountant filed an application before the Chief Commissioner Income Tax, Mumbai for waiver of penalty and interest u/s 273A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted that in pursuance thereof, the income tax assessment of accused Amita Puri for assessment years 1996-1997 to 2001-2002 were re-opened and finalized by ITAT Mumbai vide order dated 11.05.2009. Vide this order, the income of accused Amita Puri was ordered to be assessed on cash/receipt basis instead of accrual basis and accordingly, she has stated to have filed revised returns in these 6 assessment years.
82. Ld. PP argued that investments in the name of accused Amita Puri had been made by accused V.K. Puri from his ill gotten money as accused Amita Puri did not have so much income as to make such huge investments as reflected in the revised income tax returns filed by her. He further argued that no reliance can be placed on the revised income tax returns filed by accused Amita Puri as these have been prepared and filed after the end of the check period when the investigation of this case was going on and this was done only to fabricate the grounds for evading the prosecution and punishment in this case.
83. Manifestly, there does not appear to be any dispute between the parties so far as the salary income received by accused Amita Puri is CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 75 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. concerned. The same stands as Rs. 48,617.80 which is manifest from her salary details sent by Principal, Walsingham House School to the IO Ex. P-31 (admitted by accused Amita Puri). The IO seems to have taken note of every other income of accused Amita Puri as reflected in the initial income tax returns filed by her during the check period and has thus shown her income from other sources as Rs. 17,94,348/-.
84. Accused V.K. Puri appearing as DW-10 has proved the original I.T. Returns of accused Amita Puri for the assessment years 1994- 1995, 1995-1996, 1996-1997 as Ex. DW-10/A, Ex. DW-10/B and Ex. DW-10/C. The application submitted on behalf of the accused Amita Puri in the year 2002 for waiver of penalty and interest U/s 273A of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a part of Ex. PW-150/B (Colly.). DW-10 has also proved the order dt. 11.05.2009 passed by ITAT Mumbai is Ex. DW- 10/E, the assessment orders dt. 12.01.2010 and 15.04.2010 as Ex. DW-10/F to Ex. DW-10/R. It is, therefore, evident that the revised returns for the assessment years 1997-1998, 1998-1999, 1999-2000, 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 [part of Ex. PW-150/B (Colly.)] had been filed by accused Amita Puri in the year 2002 after the commencement of investigation in this case and fresh assessment orders have been passed in this regard by the concerned Income Tax Officers in the year 2010.
85. The best witness to prove the income earned by accused Amita Puri is she herself. She has entered the witness box as DW-9 to explain her income and investments during the check period. She has deposed that she worked as a Teacher in a private school i.e. Walshingham School Mumbai from 1995-1998. However, she has CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 76 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. nowhere stated in her entire testimony as to how much monthly salary did she draw during this period. As already noted hereinabove, her salary details sent by the principal of the said school to the IO (Ex. P-
31) show the total salary earned by her during this period as Rs. 48,617.80. Needless to state here again that the salaried income earned by Amita Puri is not disputed on behalf of the accused.
86. DW9 has further deposed that she used to earn about Rs. 50,000/- per annum from tuitions and a sum of Rs. 25,000/- per annum from investments in shares during the years 1988 upto the year 1998. Hence by her own saying she was earning Rs. 75,000/- per annum only from the tuitions and investments. She has further deposed that she used to visit her parental house at least thrice a year and used to be paid a sum of Rs. 4000/- to Rs.5000/- on each visit by her brothers and parents which amount got increased to Rs. 15,000/- per visit from the year 1990 onwards. She also states that her parents used to visit her matrimonial house twice a year and used to pay her Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 15,000/- per visit. Her further deposition is that her parents sold their house in Amritsar in the year 1993 and paid her Rs. 1 Lakh from sale proceeds of the house.
87. Whatever income was earned by Amita Puri other than her salary (either from tuitions or from investments etc.) was reflected in her income tax returns and has been duly taken into account by the Investigating Officer. No other purported income of accused Amita Puri can be taken into account for the reason that it was never brought to knowledge of the IO during the course of investigation. Explaining the meaning of the words "known sources of income" used in the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 77 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Explanation attached to Section 13 (1) (e) of P.C. Act, the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Vs. Selvi J. Jayalalitha & Others, J.T. 2017 (4) SC 14 has enunciated that the "known sources of income" must have reference to sources known to the prosecution on a thorough investigation of the case and it cannot be the resources known to the accused. (See Paragraph No. 210 of the report). These sources of income of accused Amita Puri could not be known by the IO during the investigation of this case. Also, it is not the case of the accused that they had apprised the IO about such income but he didn't consider. There is no document on record reflecting any such income of accused Amita Puri or the fact that she had intimated the same to the IO. The assertions in this regard are patently concocted and afterthought, hence rejected.
88. I feel in agreement with the submissions of the Ld. PP that the extra income offered by accused Amita Puri in her revised income tax returns which runs in Lacs of Rupees cannot be taken into account merely for the reason that the same has been accepted by the Income Tax Department by passing fresh income tax assessment orders. Assessment of the income offered by accused Amita Puri in the said revised income tax returns, for the purposes of computation of the income tax to be levied upon her does not show that the source of that income was genuine and lawful. It does not appear that the income tax department was concerned or interested in finding out the source of income offered for income tax by accused Amita Puri in these revised returns. The department was only interested in ensuring that income shown by the assessee does not escape levy of the income tax. More importantly it is to be noted that the exercise of filing CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 78 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. revised income tax returns was undertaken by accused Amita Puri and her husband after the commencement of investigation in this case, which also makes the same doubtful and far from being bonafide. This exercise appears to have been undertaken for escaping the criminal liability in this case. Mere fact that some income is offered for levy of income tax, does not make it lawful or legitimate. The assessee is bound to prove that the source of that income was legal and legitimate. All the legitimate income of accused Amita Puri as reflected in her original income tax returns has been considered by the investigating officer. Hence, the additional income offered for tax assessment in revised returns cannot be taken into account.
89. Documents on record i.e. Ex. P-31 and Ex. DW-10/Z19 show that the accused Amita Puri had received refund of her provident fund in sum of Rs. 4,973/- and Contributory Provident Fund in sum of Rs. 4,973/- alongwith the interest. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 10,903/- as mentioned at Serial No. 10 of the table reproduced in Para No. 80 hereinabove needs to be added her income during the check period. Similarly, documents on record which form part of Ex. PW-154/Z127 (Colly.) show that she had received the dividend in sum of Rs. 9,970/- upon her shares of L & T Company during the years 1992-01, which amount also has to be added to her income during the check period.
90. The amount of Rs. 5,28,637.5 as mentioned in serial number 13 of the aforesaid table is stated to have been paid by Late Sh. I.S. Puri to D.D.A. towards the price of Category III Flat in Pocket A, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. It is argued that Sh. I.S. Puri has bequeathed his share in the said flat in favour of accused Amita Puri vide registered CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 79 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. will dated 24.12.1993 and therefore, the aforesaid amount paid by him as purchase price of the flat should be included in the income of Amita Puri. This court feels unable to accept the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the accused in this regard. The said amount had been directly paid by late Sh I.S. Puri to D.D.A. and not to accused Amita Puri. This amount cannot be added to the income of accused Amita Puri merely for the reason that Sh. I.S. Puri has bequeathed his share in the flat in her favour. At the most, the share of Sh. I.S. Puri in the said flat which has been bequeathed upon her can be taken as an asset in her hands at the end of the check period, if the flat had not been disposed off before the end of check period.
91. The aforesaid Will dt 24.12.1993, a copy of which is on record at Page No. 7 in the file D-58 (admitted by both the accused during the course of admission/denial of documents) which had been seized by CBI vide seizure memo dt. 13.03.2002 from Sh. G.S. Date, Superintendent (Vigilance), Central Excise, Pune, as deposed by the IO (PW-154). The memo alongwith the file is Ex. PW-154/D (Colly.) Vide the said Will, the Late Sh. I.S. Puri has also bequeathed the amounts lying in his bank account at Central Bank, Parliament Street, New Delhi to accused Amita Puri. Intimation in this regard has duly been given by accused V.K. Puri to his department vide his letter dt. 23.02.1999 (Ex. A-70) which is at Page No. 8 of the said file. It is mentioned therein that the balance in the said bank account stood at Rs. 1,86,879.21 as on 31.12.1997 and the exact balance alongwith interest thereupon added after 31.12.1997 was not known. It appears that the amount of Rs. 1,97,993.2 as stated in Serial No. 14 of the aforesaid table given in para No. 80 hereinabove reflects the total CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 80 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. amount in the said account alongwith interest. Therefore, this amount of Rs. 1,97,993.2 needs to be added to the income of accused Amita Puri during the check period.
92. There are no legally admissible documents on record to show that the accused Amita Puri had actually received the amounts as mentioned in Serial nos. 12, 15, 16, 17, 18 & 19 of the aforesaid table. No document reflecting any such income was produced by the accused during the investigation of this case or during the cross examination of any prosecution witness. The documents produced in this regard by accused V.K. Puri (DW-10) during his testimony before this court are only certain letters purportedly received by him from various banks/companies. However, no witness from any such bank or company has been examined to prove the genuineness and authenticity of those letters. Even the accused Amita Puri appearing as DW-9 has not deposed even a word about the such income stated to have been earned by her during the check period. Therefore, none of the figures stated against the above serial numbers in the table reproduced in Paragraph No. 80 herienabove can be included in the accused Amita Puri during the check period.
93. It may be noted here that as per the oral/documentary evidence on record, huge investments have been made in the name of accused Amita Puri during the check period. It is the case of the prosecution itself that there have been investments to the tune of Lakhs of Rupees in the name of accused Amita Puri during the check period, some of which have been admitted by her and some have been denied by her. The case of the prosecution is that the investments in her name in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 81 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. banks and private companies have been made by her husband from the ill gotten money, whereas the accused contended that these investments have been made by her from her own genuine earnings including the stridhan and other cash gifts received by her from parental family and inlaws family.
94. The exact value of these investments and how much of these stands proved by the prosecution would be examined and calculated in the later part of this judgment under the heading "Assets in possession of the accused at the end of the check period".
95. In the chart submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the accused, as reproduced hereinabove in para No. 80, the accused Amita Puri is shown to have got a sum of Rs. 67,10,259/- from the sale of gold jewellery/silver articles. This needs to be discussed in detail. In this regard, it is contended on behalf of the accused that V.K. Puri's father Sh. I.S. Puri had handed over some old gold jewellery as well as silver utensils to his daughter in law i.e. accused Amita Puri, which he had brought from Pakistan at the time of partition of India in the year 1947. It is further contended that the accused Amita Puri sold these jewellery articles/silver utensils to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, during the period September, 1992 to June 1995 for a total sum of Rs. 87,10,259/-. It is submitted that the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) manifest the said sale of gold jewellery/silver articles by accused Amita Puri and show that she had sold the gold jewellery weighing 20,108.452 gms for Rs. 76,62,902/- and silver utensils weighing 197.238 Kgs for Rs. 10,47,357/-. It is argued that out of these sale proceeds of the said gold/silver, accused Amita Puri paid a sum of Rs. 4 Lakhs each to the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 82 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. three brothers and two sisters of her husband V.K. Puri as per the wishes of her father in law Late Sh. I.S. Puri and thus she was left with a sum of Rs. 67,10,259/- with her which she invested by way of FDRs etc in banks and private companies. Thus, it is sought to be argued that the said amount of Rs. 67,10,259/- was in the nature of stridhan of accused Amita Puri which she was free to invest in the manner she like without interference of her husband V.K. Puri and the earnings made by her from the investments of said sum of money belong to her alone upon which V.K. Puri had no right or claim. It is argued that accused Amita Puri had made investments in her name in the banks and private companies out of this amount which she had got from the sale of gold/silver and therefore, such investments are own genuine investments. Per contra, it is argued by Ld. PP that no such gold or silver was ever handed over to accused Amita Puri by her father in law Late Sh. I.S. Puri and a totally false story about the sale of such gold and silver has been fabricated in order to provide a false explanation to the investments made in her name by her husband V.K. Puri out of his ill gotten money.
96. The copies of the bills vide which accused Amita Puri claims to have sold the aforesaid gold jewellery and silver utensils to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, are Ex. P-34 (Colly.). For the sake of convenience, the details of these bills are reproduced in the following table:-
Bill Bill No. Date Item Description Weight in Rate (Rs.) Bill Amount Book Gms. (Rs.) I 62 14-9-92 Old Gold Jewellery (Kandore) 266.898 g 3,675 98,085 67 24-9-92 " (Chain) 281.243 g 3,548 99,785 79 14-10-92 " (Haar) 295.232 g 3,450 101,855 96 14-11-92 Old Gold Jewellery 235.610 g 3,650 85,997 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 83 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. II 114 14-12-92 " (Chain) 260.765 g 3,583 93,432 117 16-12-92 " (Patale) 271.072 g 3,583 97,125 119 18-12-92 " (Haar) 275.639 g 3,621 99,809 121 21-12-92 " (Bangles) 285.869 g 3,435 98,196 125 23-12-92 Old Silver Utensils 17.295 g 5,602 96,886 126 4-1-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 281.270 g 3,440 96,756 127 5-1-93 " (Bangles) 241.387 g 3,577 86,344 128 6-1-93 " 199.447 g 4,434.5 88,445 130 11-1-93 Old Silver Utensils 15.887 Kg 5,708.5 90,578 131 12-1-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 261.794 g 3,773 98,775 132 22-1-93 " (Patale) 276.170 g 3,440 94,998 138 27-1-93 " (Haar) 271.170 g 3,538 95,942 139 28-1-93 " (Bangles) 296.570 g 3,342 99,115 140 29-1-93 " (Kandore) 454.650 g 3,773 171,540 141 2-2-93 " (Bangles) 290.610 g 3,425 99,533 143 6-2-93 " (Haar) 284.410 g 3,445 97,984 148 16-2-93 " (Haar) 279.140 g 3,454.5 96,429 149 18-2-93 Old Silver Utensils 18.550 Kg 5,125 95,068 151 20-2-93 " 16.55 Kg 5,625 93,093 153 23-2-93 Old gold Jewellery (Kaare) 296.530 g 3,356.5 99,530 155 2-3-93 Old gold Jewellery (Bangles) 281.500 g 3,538 99,595 157 4-3-93 " (Haar) 283.440 g 3,185 90,275 160 8-3-93 " 284.470 g 3,185 90,603 162 9-3-93 " (Chain) 285.500 g 3,185 90,931 164 12-3-93 Old Silver Utensils 18.62 Kg 5,268.5 97,181 165 13-3-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Kandore) 485.660 g 3,773 183,217 166 15-3-93 " (Kaare) 285.980 g 3,454.5 98,791 169 18-3-93 " (Haar) 290.460 g 3,425 99,482 III 5 5-4-93 " (Haar) 273.135 g 3,650.5 99,708 7 7-4-93 " (Haar) 281.280 g 3,552.5 99,926 9 9-4-93 Old Silver Utensils 19.90 Kg 5,022.5 99,937 16 14-4-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 204.070 g 4,630.5 94,495 18 19-4-93 " (Kaare) 295.780 g 3,342 98,852 24 23-4-93 " (Bangles) 205.367 g 4,528 92,990 25 5-5-93 " (Chain) 279.859 g 3,548 99,294 27 10-5-93 Old Silver Utensils 17.92 Kg 5,218.5 93,507 32 14-5-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Bangles) 278.780 g 3,525 98,269 41 5-6-93 " (Kaare) 271.080 g 3,552.5 96,301 50 5-7-93 " (Haar) 284.360 g 3,454.5 98,234 53 8-7-93 " (Bangles) 281.230 g 3,454.5 97,152 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 84 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 56 14-7-93 Old Silver Utensils 16.89 Kg 5,806.5 98,071 59 23-7-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Patale) 271.080 g 3,552.5 96,301 61 24-7-93 " (Haar) 256.790 g 3,650.5 93,743 63 2-8-93 " (Kandore) 246.480 g 3,944.5 97,223 67 5-8-93 " (Bangles) 260.770 g 3,748.5 97,751 69 9-8-93 Old Silver Utensils 18.84 Kg 5,292 99,684 72 12-8-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Kandore) 260.880 g 3,454.5 90,120 75 23-8-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 246.060 g 4,018 98,869 78 4-9-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 247.510 g 4,018 99,449 83 9-9-93 Old Silver Utensils 19.95 Kg 4.704 93,840 85 14-9-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Bangles) 258.700 g 3,552.5 91,904 89 5-10-93 " (Kandore) 261.804 g 3,552.5 93,006 91 11-10-93 Old Silver Utensils 16.836 Kg 5,316.5 89,512 93 12-10-93 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 210.460 g 4,425 93,128 IV 98 5-11-93 " (Bangles) 246.488 g 3,748.5 92,396 99 6-11-93 " (Haar) 230.162 g 4,018 92,479 104 6-12-93 " (Patale) 250.447 g 3,748.5 93,880 113 25-12-93 " (Haar) 260.763 g 3552.5 92,636 122 4-1-94 " (Kandore) 210.460 g 4,325 91,023 129 13-1-94 Old Gold Jewellery 214.397 g 4,238.5 90,872 131 24-1-94 " 209.856 g 4,336.5 91,004 136 5-2-94 " 208.631 g 4,336.5 90,473 140 14-2-94 " 215.418 g 4,434.5 95,527 144 23-2-94 " 219.846 g 4,336.5 95,336 153 25-2-94 " 224.386 g 4,336.5 97,305 156 5-3-94 " 220.059 g 4,238.5 93,272 159 14-3-94 " 203.674 g 4,630.5 94,311 162 23-3-94 " 184.468 g 4,630.5 85,418 V 15 5-4-94 " 527.193 g 3,773.5 198,910 16 14-4-94 " 204.071 g 4,630.5 94,495 18 18-4-94 " 520.640 g 3,577 186,233 22 19-4-94 " 501.010 g 3,773 189,031 27 23-4-94 " 209.573 g 4,434.5 92,935 VI 104 14-10-94 Old Gold Jewellery (Haar) 178.780 g 5,125 91,624 123 12-11-94 Old Gold Jewellery 192.743 g 5,022.25 96,805 125 14-11-94 " 383.416 g 3,577 137,143 131 25-11-94 " 204.071 g 4,826.5 98,495 135 5-12-94 " 182.200 g 5,033.5 91,710 138 12-12-94 Old Gold Jewellery 373.078 g 3,548 132,368 140 14-12-94 " 185.621 g 5,022.5 93,228 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 85 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 144 5-1-95 " 195.571 g 4,924.5 96,309 153 23-1-95 " 173.469 g 5,096 88,400 8,710,259
97. Around 20 Kg of gold and 200 Kg. of Silver which accused Amita Puri claims to have received from her father-in-law Sh. I.S. Puri, is a very huge quantity. By no stretch of imagination can such a quantity of gold and silver said to be a small quantity which could be available in an average middle class household. There is nothing on record either in the cross-examination of any of the prosecution witnesses including the IO or in the testimony of the defence witnesses to show that Sh. I.S. Puri was having sufficient source of income which had made him capable to amass such huge quantity of gold jewellery/silver utensils or that he had inherited these articles from his ancestors. It has come in the cross examination of IO (PW154) that I.S. Puri had retired from the post of SDO in Military Engineering Service (MES). Thus, he was only a government servant. It is beyond any imagination that he could have acquired such huge amount of gold/silver from his salary. There is no evidence on record to show the source from where did he get so much enormous haul of gold jewellery and silver utensils. It is also difficult to believe in the absence of any cogent evidence that Sh. I.S.Puri was in a position to bring such huge quantity of gold and silver with him from Pakistan to India at the time of partition in the year 1947 amidst the turmoil and hostile circumstances which had been created by the partition.
98. DW9 has deposed that her father in law Sh. I.S. Puri had given her some old gold jewellery as well as silver articles during the years 1992-1994 which she sold in the same period for about Rs. 80 Lacs.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 86 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. She has further deposed that she sold the entire gold jewellery as well as silver articles to M/s Ambika Jewellers, the Proprietor of which is Sh. Vinesh Vyas (Accused No. 3) who made all the payments to her in cash and used to issue her a receipt mentioning therein the details of the jewellery/articles handed over by her to him. She deposed that proper receipts were lateron issued by him to her at the end of year 2000. She also stated that out of the sale proceeds of the aforesaid gold jewellery/silver articles, she paid Rs. 4,00,000/- each to the three brothers and two sisters of her husband. She had paid a sum of Rs. 2 Lacs to her sister in law Ms. Usha Bandula by way of two cheques and remaining sum of Rs. 2 Lacs in cash. According to her, she also paid money to her brother-in-law Sh. Y.K. Puri by way of two cheques in sum of Rs. 1 Lac each, one cheque in sum of Rs. 2 Lacs and further sum of Rs. 75,000/- by way of 3 cheques. She has not given the details of the payments of Rs. 4 lacs made by her to Sh. Mahender Puri and Sh. Narender Puri other two brothers of her husband and to her other sister-in-law Ms. Sumishtha. She has not explained as to why did she pay the sum of Rs. 4 Lacs each to her three brothers-in-law and 2 sisters-in-law out of the sale proceeds of the gold jewellery/silver articles which had been given to her by her father-in-law Sh. I.S. Puri. Presumably, as argued by the Ld. Defence Counsels, she had paid the said amount to them as her father-in-law Sh. I.S. Puri had told her to distribute these gold and silver articles amongst all his children.
99. DW-3, who is husband of Usha Bandola one of the sisters-in- law of accused Amita Puri, has deposed that his father-in-law had handed over gold and silver jewellery to Amita Puri with the directions CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 87 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. to pay equal amounts to all his children in lieu of the same.
100. DW4, Mahender Kumar Puri who is one of the brothers-in-law of accused Amita Puri had deposed that his father has handed over silver and gold jewellery to Amita Puri asking her to distribute the same among his children mutually. The testimony of these two witnesses indicates that Sh. I.S. Puri has asked Amita Puri to distribute the gold and silver jewellery amongst his children equally. If that was the case, it is not understandable as to why accused Amita Puri paid only Rs. 4 Lacs each to her three brothers-in-law and two sisters-in-law and kept a sum of around Rs. 67 Lacs for herself. None of her brothers-in-law or sisters-in-law appears to have enquired from her about exact or approximate sum of money she got from the purported sale of gold jewellery/silver articles given to her by their father and why she had kept a lion's share out of the same with her.
101. The documents on record also, which are admitted by the accused themselves, contradict the assertion of accused Amita Puri that her father in law had handed over any such gold jewellery and silver articles to her to be distributed amongst his children. The documents contained in file D-112 which is Ex. PW-127/C are admitted by accused and are marked as Ex. P-4. As per the deposition of PW127, this file alongwith certain other files were recovered from the search of accused V.K. Puri's Chamber in his office by CBI Team in February, 2002 vide search list Ex. PW-127/A. PW127 was witness to this search. Page No. 124 of this file is a document apparently in the handwriting of Sh. I.S. Puri, father of accused V.K. Puri and father in law of accused Amita Puri. It is also CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 88 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. signed by him at the end and bears the date as 25.10.1994. It would be apposite to reproduce here the contents of the said document :-
To whomsoever it may concern Consequent upon the family settlement and distribution among any sons and daughters of the movable properties belonging to my late wife Smt. Lilawati Puri & myself, the following is the share given to my son Sh. Vijay Kumar Puri, namely-
1. Gold Bangles - 16 Nos.
2. Gold Karas - 6 Nos.
3. Gold tops - 3 Pairs
4. Gold studded with diamond tops - 3 Pairs
5. Gold Rings - 3 Nos.
6. Gold Diamond Rings - 1 No.
7. Pendant of Gold - 1 No.
8. Gold Chain - 2 Nos.
9. Gold Necklace Set - 4 Nos.
10. Gold studded with diamond - 1 Nos.
necklace set
102. Thus, as per this document, Sh. I.S. Puri had himself distributed the movable properties belonging to him as well as to his late wife Leelawati Puri amongst his children in pursuance to a family settlement and the jewellery items mentioned therein had come to the share of accused V.K. Puri. A due intimation about the same had been given by accused V.K. Puri to his department vide his letter dt. 02.11.1994 which is at page No. 151 in the said file. Hence, when I.S. Puri had himself distributed the movable properties i.e. gold/diamond jewellery owned by him as well as his late wife, amongst his children in the year 1994, where was the occasion for him to handover the gold jewellery weighing around 20 Kgs and silver utensils weighing around 200 Kgs to his daughter in law i.e. accused amita Puri separately during the years 1992-94 to be distributed amongst his children. Had such huge amount of gold jewellery and silver utensils been possessed by Sh. I.S. Puri he would have distributed the same CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 89 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. amongst his children vide the family settlement referred to in the aforesaid document alongwith the articles mentioned in the same. This totally falsifies the story concocted by the accused that Sh. I.S. Puri had given his gold/silver to accused Amita Puri to be distributed amongst his children.
103. The file D-58 which, as per the deposition of IO (PW-154) has been seized from Superintendent (Vigilance), Cenral Excise, Pune, has been proved by him as Ex. PW-154/D (Colly.). This file consists of the record of various intimations sent by accused V.K. Puri to his department relating to the movable and immovable properties acquired by him as well as his wife. All these intimations alongwith the supported documents in the file are admitted by the accused during the course of admission/denial of documents. At Page No. 7 is the copy of Registered Will dt. 24.12.1993 of Late Sh. I.S. Puri whereby he is bequeathed his share in the DDA Flat at Sarita Vihar and the money lying in his bank account at Central Bank, Parliament Street, New Delhi to accused Amita Puri. Intimation about the same has been given by accused V.K. Puri to his department vide his letter dt. 23.02.1999 (Ex.A-70) after his father I.S. Puri died on 18.12.1998. The amount lying in the aforesaid bank account of Late Sh. I.S. Puri is mentioned in the said intimation letter as Rs. 1,86,879.21 as on 31.12.1997.
104. It is not understandable when Sh. I.S. Puri was conscious enough to distribute the gold/diamond belonging to him as well as his wife amongst his children by way of a family settlement already noted hereinabove and also to bequeath his share in the DDA Flat as well as CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 90 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the money lying in his bank account to accused Amita Puri by way of the registered will dt. 24.12.1993, why would he handover huge amount of gold jewellery and silver utensils to her during his lifetime without executing any document and why would he leave the task of distributing those amongst his children to her instead of undertaking the said task himself. It also intrigues the court as to why accused V.K. Puri did not intimate his department about the sale proceeds of such gold jewellery/silver utensils retained by her wife when he had duly intimated his department about the money lying in the bank account of late Sh. I.S. Puri got by her by virtue of the aforesaid Will dt. 24.12.1993.
105. Further, the table given in Para No. 96 hereinabove, shows that accused Amita Puri did not sell the entire gold/silver in one transaction. She appears to have sold it in small trenches starting from 14.09.1992 and completing the same on 23.01.1995. In her cross-examination, she has stated that there were several jewellery shops in Bada Sharaffa Bazar, Indore, and she was referred to the shop of Mr. Vinesh Vyas I.e M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers by her friend Anita Sen who was also residing in Indore. She has further deposed that she sold the entire jewellery in about 10-15 visits and for a sum of about Rs. 4000/- per 10 grams. All these statements are absolutely incorrect in view of the details contained in the table given in paragraph no. 96 hereinabove which has been prepared on the basis of copies of the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.). She has further deposed that her husband was not accompanying her to the said shop for the sale of gold/silver as he was not interested in the same and asked her to go to the market alone. She also deposed that it took her about 15-20 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 91 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. minutes to reach the said shop from their residence by car and she used to drive the car herself.
106. Here it needs note that accused V.K. Puri was posted as Additional Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai from July 1992 to June 1995. Accused Amita Puri has also deposed in her cross-examination that she had been staying together with her husband V.K. Puri almost throughout the entire period after their marriage. This is indicative of the fact that she was residing with her husband V.K. Puri in Mumbai from July 1992 to June 1995. So it is immensely intriguing as to how and why would she sell the gold/silver articles in Indore, when she alongwith her husband was residing in Mumbai. Evidently, as per her deposition, Sh. Vinesh Vyas, the Proprietor of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, was not known to her. She had not dealt with him previously. She also admits that she knew that M/s Ambika Jewellers deals only with artificial jewellery. Further, she appears to have made 86 visits to the shop of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers to complete the sale of entire gold/silver. She has nowhere explained as to what prevented her from selling the entire quantity of gold jewellery and silver utensils in one go and why did she prefer to take these items in small quantities for sale. It is very difficult to believe that she would have traveled 86 times from Mumbai to Indore either by train or by car alongwith gold/silver merely to sell it at Indore, which she could have done at Mumbai also. There was no point in taking such huge risk on each visit, when the gold/silver could have easily been sold at Mumbai.
107. What makes the entire story about the purported sale of gold CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 92 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. jewellery/silver articles of accused Amita Puri more doubtful is that she did not produce any bill/receipt/invoice issued to her at the time of sale of the same between 14.09.1992 and 23.01.1995. The bills/invoices copies of which are Ex. P-34 (Colly.) had been admittedly procurred by the accused from M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers in the year 2000. PW121 had prepared these bills as he was working at the shop of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers around the year 2000. During his examination in chief recorded on 15.10.2014, he has disowned his statement U/s 164 Cr. PC, copy of which is Ex. PW-121/C saying that he was pressurized by CBI to make such a statement. When he was questioned as to which part of the statement was made by him on the dictation of CBI officers, he stated that he was told by CBI to state that the bills were written by him on the asking of Sh. Vinesh Vyas (accused No. 3) whereas these were in fact written by him on the asking of Sh. Amarji who is cousin of Vinesh Vyas. He had been declared hostile on the request of Ld. PP and was cross-examined by Ld. PP. In his cross-examination by Ld. PP on 22.01.2018, he deposed that he had made the statement u/s 164 Cr. PC Ex. PW- 121/C to the Ld. MM voluntarily without any pressure. He also stated that these bills were prepared by him in the beginning of year 2000. In the cross examination conducted on behalf of the accused, he deposed that he alongwith Dipesh who also was an employee of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, had prepared these bills together.
108. Whether or not had this witness PW121 made some portion of his statement u/s 164 Cr. PC Ex. PW-121/C (that he had prepared these bills on the asking of Vinesh Vyas) under the pressure of CBI Officials, has lost its relevance for the reason that accused Vinesh CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 93 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Vyas has already been discharged by the Hon'ble High Court, as noted hereinabove. It is evident from the testimony of this witness that he alongwith another employee Dipesh had prepared these bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) in the year 2000. However, it is not clear from his testimony as to whether they had prepared these bills on the basis of any record maintained by M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers or merely on the oral directions of anybody with regards to the date to be written on the bills and the weight of gold and silver to be mentioned on them. The documents proved on record by the prosecution show that no such record had been maintained by M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers. The file related to Income Tax Returns of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers for the years 1985-1986 to 2000-2001 Ex. PW-154/Z16 (admitted by accused Vinesh Vyas as Ex. P-36), cash book and ledger of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers seized vide Seizure Memo dt. 20.12.2002 Ex. PW-154/Z18, Cash Books, Ledgers, Bill Books, Purchase Bills of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers seized vide seizure memo dt. 19.12.2002 Ex. PW-154/Z60 to Ex. PW-154/Z67 and Income Tax Assessment Orders as well as Trading Account of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers received by the investigating officer vide letter dt. 20.08.2002 Ex. PW-154/Z147 (Colly.) do not reflect any such sale of gold jewellery/silver utensils by accused Amita Puri to the said firm between the years 1992 and 1994.
109. Hence, it is very intriguing as to on which basis had the PW121 and Dipesh prepared the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) in the year 2000 when there was no record of any sale of gold/silver by Amita Puri to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers in any of the books or ledgers maintained by the said firm. It is, thus, evident that these bills do not reflect any actual sale of gold/silver by accused Amita Puri to M/s Shree Ambika CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 94 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Jewellers and the contents of these bills are absolutely concocted as well as imaginary and the same have been got forged by the accused V.K. Puri & Amita Puriwith the connivance of Vinesh Vyas, the proprietor of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore. It may also be noted here that the price at which accused Amita Puri appears to have sold the gold/silver to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, which is mentioned datewise in the table reproduced in Paragraph No. 96 hereinabove does not co-relate to and infact is much lower than the price of Gold/Silver prevailing in the markets in Indore on the corresponding date as mentioned in the letter dt. 24.12.2002 Ex. PW- 154/Z15 received by the Investigating Officer (PW154) from Indore Chandi Sona Jawaharat Vyapar Association. Accused Amita Puri (DW9) has deposed that she had enquired about the prices of Gold and Silver from various Jewellers in Indore but Vinesh Vyas quoted the highest price of the day. But, in fact the prices reflected in the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) are much lower that the prices prevalent in the market on any specific day. This too indicates that no such gold/silver was actually sold by her to the said firm and the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) are fabricated & fictitious documents.
110. Sh. Tejal Kumar Pradeep Kumar Choksi, the Proprietor of M/s Choksi Pradeep Kumar Mani Lal & Brothers has appeared as DW7. He has deposed that M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers of Indore has sold jewellery to them several times during the year 1992-1995. However, he did not produce any record showing such sale of gold/silver to him by M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers on the pretext that the records have been submitted by him to the Income Tax Department. He proved the copy of an affidavit as Ex. DW-7/A which purportedly contains the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 95 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. details of these transactions but in the absence of any record of the said firm M/s Choksi Pradeep Kumar Mani Lal & Brothers, the authenticity of the details of the transactions mentioned in the said affidavit cannot be believed.
111. DW8 is the person who is stated to have facilitated meeting between accused V.K. Puri and DW7 in the year 2004-2005.
112. At best what the above noted testimony of DW7 and DW8 goes on show is that some old jewellery was sold by M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers to M/s Choksi Pradeep Kumar Mani Lal & Brothers during the years 1992-1995 but their depositions are not sufficient to indicate that any gold/silver was sold by accused Amita Puri to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers and same gold/silver was lateron sold by Ms Shree Ambika Jewellers to M/s Choksi Pradeep Kumar Mani Lal & Brothers.
113. The submissions of the Ld. Defence Counsel that the amount of Rs. 67,10,259/- retained by accused Amita Puri out of the sale proceeds of the gold/silver was in the nature of her stridhan as it was gifted to her by her father-in-law, is totally erroneous. Accused Amita Puri herself as DW9 and the other two defence witnesses DW3 and DW4 have consistently deposed that the gold jewellery and silver articles were given by Sh. I.S. Puri to her with the directions to distribute the same amongst his children mutually. This is indicative of the fact that the gold/silver purportedly handed over to accused Amita Puri by her father in law was not for her own exclusive benefit/use but was to be distributed amongst the children of Sh. I.S. Puri. Thus, it was in no way given to her as a gift. At best, she could claim only as a CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 96 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. trustee of the said gold/silver and had been entrusted with the duty to distribute it amongst the children of I.S. Puri. When accused Amita Puri claims to have paid a sum of Rs. 4 Lakhs each to her three brothers-in-law and two sisters-in-law (the children of I.S. Puri other than her husband) out of the purported sale proceeds of the gold/silver, she appears to have known that the same was to be distributed amongst the children of I.S. Puri and she herself had no exclusive right over the same. Hence, the said purported gold/silver was never intended to be her stridhan and also does not qualify as her stridhan. In such fact situation the sum of Rs. 67,10,259/- purportedly retained by her from the sale proceeds of the gold/silver actually belonged to accused V.K. Puri, being one of the children of I.S. Puri. He was, thus, duty bound to intimate his department about the receipt of said sum of money from the purported sale proceeds of gold/silver given to his wife by his father. Admittedly, he has not given any such intimation to his department even though he had been intimating the acquisition of movable and immovable properties to his department regularly. As already noted hereinabove, accused V.K. Puri had intimated to his department about the gold/diamond jewellery which had fallen to his share in pursuance to the family settlement, reference to which has been made in Ex. P-4 (at Page No. 124).
114. It is submitted by Ld. Defence Counsel that the nature of burden of proof resting uon the accused is only to establish their defence by preponderance of probabilities and the burden upon them is not as strict as that upon the prosecution which has to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1976 4SCC 233, Sh.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 97 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Rabindra Kumar Dey Vs. State of Orissa, wherein it has been observed as under:-
"It is true that under Section 105 of the Evidence Act the onus of proving exceptions mentioned in the Indian Penal Code lies on the accused, but this section does not at all indicate the nature and standard of proof required. The Evidence Act does not contemplate that the accused should prove his case with the same strictness and rigour as the prosecution is required to prove a criminal charge. In fact, from the cardinal principles referred to above, it follows that, it is sufficient if the accused is able to rove his case by the standard of preponderance of probabilities as envisaged by Section 5 of the Evidence Act as a result of which he succeeds not because he proves his case to the hilt but because probabilities of the version given by him throws doubt on the prosecution case and, therefore, the prosecution cannot be said to have established the charge beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, the mode of proof, by standard of benefit of doubt, is not applicable to the accused, where he is called upon to prove his case or to prove the exceptions of the Indian Penal Code on which he seeks to rely. It is sufficient for the defence to give a version which competes in probability with the prosecution version, for that would be sufficient to throw suspicion on the prosecution case entailing its rejection by the court."
115. This court feels unable to agree with the submissions of the Ld. Counsel. Here it would be apposite to refer to the latest judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as J.T. 2017 (4) SC 14 State of Karnataka Vs. Selvi Jayalalitha & others, wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed as under:-
" 214. In K. Ponnuswamy Vs. State of T.N., (2001) 6 SCC 674, this Court referred to the definition of the word "proved" in Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and also Section 114 thereof. While noting that in terms thereof, a fact is said to be CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 98 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. proved when after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man, under the circumstances of the particular case, ought to act upon this supposition that it exists. It reflected also on the permissible presumption envisaged under the statute, with regard to the existence of any fact which a Court is likely to think to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business in relation to the facts of a particular case.
215. The significance of this decision is that while evaluating the evidence on record, the attendant facts and circumstances need be taken note of as well, to determine as to whether the materials available, having regard to the common course of natural events and human conduct do logically prove the point in issue."
116. I may also refer here to paragraph no. 219 of the report of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case which is reproduced as under:-
219. A Constitution Bench of this Court in K. Veeraswami Vs. Union of India & Ors., (1991) 3 SCC 655, again elaborating on an offence under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5 (2) of the Act 1947 reaffirmed the view that clause (e) of Section 5 (1) created a statutory offence which must be proved by the prosecution and when the onus is discharged by it, the accused has to account satisfactorily for the disproportionality of the properties possessed by him. It was noted that the Section did make available a statutory defence to the accused which he/she was to prove and that the public servant was required to account for the disparity of the assets qua the income. Though it was observed that the legal burden of proof placed on the accused was not so onerous as that of the prosecution, it was enunciated that it would not be enough to just throw some doubt on the prosecution version. Referring to the expression "satisfactorily account", it was ruled that due emphasis CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 99 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. must be accorded to the word "satisfactorily" which signified that the accused has to satisfy the Court that his explanation was worthy of acceptance. Though it was marked that the procedure was contrary to the well known principle of criminal jurisprudence that the burden of proof lay always on the prosecution and did never shift to the accused, the competence of the Parliament to shift such burden on certain aspects and particular in matters especially in the knowledge of the accused, was acknowledged. The plea of the appellant therein that the possession of assets disproportionate to one's source of income is no offence, till the public servant was able to account for the excess thereof was not accepted. It was held that if one possesses assets beyond his legitimate means, it goes without saying that the excess is out of ill-gotten gain observing that assets are not drawn like Nitrogen from the air and that have to be essentially acquired, for which means are necessary. It was stressed upon that the public servant concerned was required to prove the source of income or the means by which he had acquired the assets. It was propounded that once the prosecution proved that the public servant possessed assets dis-proportionate to his known sources of income, the offence of criminal conduct was attributed to him but it would be open to him to satisfactorily account for such disproportionality. (Emphasis supplied).
117. Thus, in a case U/s 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 where the accused public servant is facing charges for having amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, it is not enough for him to merely state various other sources of his income and that of his family members apart from the sources known to the prosecution. He is obliged to prove those sources of income or the means by which he has acquired the assets, to the satisfaction of the court. The burden upon the accused in such cases is more onerous & heavier than that in other criminal cases where it is CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 100 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. sufficient for the accused to give a version which competes in probability with the prosecution version.
118. In view of the oral and documentary evidence on record, as discussed hereinabove, the contention of the accused that some old gold jewellery/silver utensils had been given to accused Amita Puri by her father-in-law I.S. Puri in the years 1992-1994 and that she had sold the same to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, for a total sum of Rs. 87,10,259/- and that out of the same, she had retained a sum of Rs. 67,10,259/-, does not stand proved. Hence, the sum of Rs. 67,10,259/- cannot be included in the income of accused Amita Puri during the check period.
119. Ld. Defence Counsel had also pressed into service another judgment of the Supreme Court in Wasudeo Ramchandra's Case 1981 3SCC 199 (Supra). That too is of no help to the accused as in that case, the appellant public servant had produced cogent evidence to prove his defence that the assets found in his possession did not belong to him but to his ancestors. In the instant case, the evidence produced by the accused with regards to the gold/silver purportedly given by late Sh. I.S. Puri to accused Amita Puri is not only unbelievable but manifestly appears to be concocted, fabricated and fictitious. The bills/invoices Ex. P-34 (Colly.) are found to be forged documents.
120. Hence, the total income of accused Amita Puri during the check period has to be taken as Rs. 20,61,832.50 (i.e. Rs.48,617.80 + Rs.17,94,348.50 + Rs.10,903 + Rs.9,970 + Rs.1,97,993.20). This CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 101 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. takes the total income earned by the two accused V.K. Puri and Amita Puri during the check period to Rs. 52,15,441.28 (Rs.31,53,608.78 + Rs. 20,61,832.50) Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Fifteen Thousand Four Hundred Forty One and Twenty Eight Paise.
Discussion on the expenditure of accused during the check period
121. According to the prosecution, the total expenditure of the accused during the check period was Rs. 19,07,468.82 under the following heads:-
1. General/Kitchen expenditure : Rs. 3,88,418/-
2. LIC Premium : Rs. 2,54,197/-
3. Income Tax paid by Mrs. Amita Puri : Rs. 3,32,200/-
4. Income Tax paid by V.K. Puri : Rs. 1,38,420/-
5. Other expenditure of Amita Puri as per IT Returns : Rs. 49,715/-
6. Other expenditure of V.K. Puri as per IT Returns : Rs. 1,58,101/-
7. Water Tax : Rs. 60,507/-
8. House Tax : Rs. 11,250/-
9. Memberships of various clubs : Rs. 84,311.50
10. Education of daughters : Rs. 2,13,311/-
11. Foreign visits etc : Rs. 1,48,621/-
12. Interest paid on bank loans : Rs. 47,701/-
13. Locker Charges : Rs. 4,700/-
14. Mobile Phone : Rs. 16,016.32 Total : Rs. 19,07,468.82 Total Expenditure during the period of Check : Rs. 19,07,468.82
122. It was submitted by Ld. PP that the amount of Rs. 3,88,418/- as General/Kitchen Expenditure has been taken to be the 1/3rd of net salary drawn by accused V.K. Puri during the check period, which is in terms of the circular issued in this regard by the CBI. It is submitted on behalf of the accused that in terms of CBI Circular No. 21/40/99 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 102 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. dated 29.11.2001, the net salary of an individual has to be taken as an amount which is left with him after deducting income tax paid by him. The Ld. Counsel has pointed towards the Serial No. 4 of the aforesaid table which mentions the income tax in the amount of Rs. 1,38,420/- paid by V.K. Puri during the check period as an item of his expenditure during the said period. He argued that in case the amount of Rs. 11,65,255/- as shown as salary income of accused V.K. Puri at Serial No. 1 of the table in paragraph No. 5 hereinabove would have been his net salary, the income tax paid by him would not have been shown as his expenditure during the check period. The Ld. PP countered the submissions of the Ld. Counsel stating that Rs. 11,65,255/- was the actual net salary drawn by V.K. Puri during check period after statutory deductions and deduction of tax at source (TDS). He further submitted that the sum of Rs. 1,38,420/- was paid by V.K. Puri as additional tax at the time of filing his income tax returns and hence it has been shown as expenditure. Nothing has been brought to my notice from the record by the Ld. Counsel for the accused to show that Rs. 11,65,255/- was the gross salary drawn by V.K. Puri during check period and not his net salary after deductions including TDS. Hence, I feel in agreement with the submissions of Ld. PP and reject the submissions of Ld. Defence Counsels.
123. So far as the expenditure of the accused shown at Serial No. 2, 3 & 4 towards LIC Premium and the income tax paid by them, same is not disputed by the accused.
124. At Serial No. 5 & 6 of the table reproduced hereinabove, the other expenditure of accused Amita Puri and V.K. Puri has been CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 103 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. shown as Rs. 49,715/- and Rs. 1,58,101/- respectively. Ld. Counsel for the accused argued that it is not understandable as to how the Investigating Officer has arrived at these two figures. Ld. PP explained that these amounts have been shown as expenditure by the two accused themselves in their income tax returns and hence they can't be heard to dispute such expenditure now. Ld. Counsel for the accused argued that Rs. 1,58,101/- was infact standard deduction under Section 24 of the Income Tax Act and not an expenditure. But his income tax returns do not show this amount as deduction under Section 24 but as expenditure. Oral deposition of DW1 (the chartered accountant who is stated to have prepared and filed the income tax return of V.K. Puri) in this regard is of no value. There is nothing on record to suggest that that this amount was in fact deduction under Section 24 and not an expenditure. Hence these sums of money have rightly been taken as expenditure of the accused during check period.
125. Expenditure of accused towards water tax during the check period is shown as Rs. 60,507/- in the aforesaid table by the prosecution. It is pointed out by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that as per the documents Ex. PW-29/A, the total amount of Sewer and Water Tax paid by the accused comes to only Rs. 46,500/-. He further submits that the amount of Rs. 16,083.50 is towards water charges as per the said document Ex. PW-29/A and therefore, cannot be counted as expenditure in view of the CBI Circular dated 29.11.2001. The document Ex. PW-29/A is the communication addressed to CBI by Executive Engineer (Revenue) Garhwal Jal Board, Dehradun, wherein the details of the water and sewer tax levied upon accused V.K. Puri for his house No. 29/4, Circular Road, Dehradun have been given. It CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 104 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. is true that a sum of Rs. 16,083.50 has been shown as water charges from December, 1991 to January, 2002 in the said document. The above referred Circular of CBI itself envisages that electricity and water charges are not to be computed separately when unverifiable expenditure is computed. Therefore, the expenditure towards water charges needs to be excluded. Only the amount of sewer & water tax as Rs. 46,500/- has to be taken as expenditure.
126. According to the prosecution, the accused have paid a sum of Rs. 11,250/- towards house tax during the check period (See Serial No. 8 in the table reproduced hereinabove). It has nowhere been explained either in the chargesheet or in the deposition of the IO (PW154) as to how and on what basis has been this figure of Rs. 11,250/- arrived at. In this regard, Ld. Counsel for the accused pointed one document from the record (D-7) which is receipt of House Tax issued by Municipal Corporation of Dehradun in the name of accused V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 9,000/- as House Tax. This receipt has been admitted by the accused during admission/denial of documents and is Ex. P-2. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for accused that only a sum of Rs. 9,000/- as reflected in the said receipt has been taken as expenditure towards House Tax. However, on the other hand another document (D-6) also on record which has been admitted by the accused and is Ex. P-1. This purports to be house tax receipt issued by Municipal Corporation of Delhi in the names of these two accused for a sum of Rs. 11,973/- in respect of the property No. A- 184, Sarita Vihar. Hence, the expenditure of the accused towards house tax shall have to be taken as Rs. 20,973/-.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 105 of 197127. According to the prosecution, the accused V.K. Puri had taken membership of various clubs namely Dehradun Club, Pune Club, Cricket Club of India, Yashwant Club and Delhi Gymkhana Club and had spent a sum of Rs. 84,311.50 towards the membership of these clubs. Accused V.K. Puri has admitted having taken membership of Delhi Gymkhana Club and having spent a sum of Rs. 5,260/- towards the same. With regards to the membership of the other four clubs, it is argued on behalf of the accused that the prosecution has failed to produce any legally admissible documentary evidence and thus, the membership of the accused in these clubs has not been proved.
128. PW25 is the witness from Dehradun Club and he was Secretary of the same from the year 2001 to 2004. He had handed over the documents pertaining to membership of accused V.K. Puri of the said club to the IO vide Seizure Memo Ex. PW-25/A. This document included the original application submitted by V.K. Puri for permanent membership of the club bearing his photograph (Ex. PW-25/B), original hand written application of V.K. Puri dated 13.11.1999 for change of his address (Ex PW-25/C), another original letter dated 20.09.1999 of accused V.K. Puri again intimating the change of his residential address with further request for information regarding formalities to be fulfilled by him (Ex. PW-25/D), original Declaration Form dated 18.11.2000 submitted by V.K. Puri to the club (Ex. PW- 25/E), print outs of the relevant entries of the ledger of the club pertaining to V.K. puri (Ex. PW-25/F1, Ex. PW-25/F2 & Ex. PW-25/G. The aforesaid original documents Ex. PW-25/B to Ex. PW-25/E manifest that accused V.K. Puri had applied for permanent membership of Dehradun Club Ltd, Dehradun. The endorsement of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 106 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the office of the club at Point Y on second page of the application Ex. PW-25/B shows that V.K. Puri had a sum of 5,000/- in cash as registration charges vide receipt No. 003181 dt. 25.10.1994. PW25 has identified the signatures of Commandant L.S.J. Negi, the then Secretary of the Club at Point A below the said endorsement. The computer print out Ex. PW-25/G bears the entry regarding a payment of Rs. 40,000/- by way of cheque by V.K. Puri on 21.10.2000 as membership fee. The print out Ex. PW-25/F1 and Ex. PW-25/F2 reflect the expenses incurred in the club by V.K. Puri. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that the aforesaid three computer print outs cannot be read in evidence as they are not accompanied by any Certificate under Section 65 of the Evidence Act. These print outs bear the certificate of PW25 alongwith his signatures and seal certifying to be true copies. He has deposed in his cross-examination that these print outs were verified by Sh. Rajiv Trikha who was senior accountant of the Club at the relevant time but whose whereabouts are not known thereafter. He has also deposed that he personally verified the contents of these 3 print outs when the same were put up before him by Rajiv Trikha. In view of the said deposition of PW25, no doubt can be entertained with regard to the authenticity of the entries in these 3 print outs. The same have been duly verified by the Senior Accounts Officer of the Club and certified by PW25 to be the true copies. It is also important to note here that no suggestion has been given to this witness on behalf of the accused to the effect that V.K. Puri had not applied for the membership of the said club or had not paid Rs. 5,000/- as registration charges, Rs. 40,000/- as membership fees and other amounts. It is thus evident from the deposition of PW25 and the documents proved by him that accused V.K. Puri had applied CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 107 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. for the membership of Dehradun Club and had paid Rs. 5,000/- as registration charges alongwith Rs. 40,000/- as membership fees and had also spend a sum of Rs. 3,887/- in the club. Thus a total sum of Rs. 48,887/- was spent by accused V.K. Puri towards his membership in Dehradun Club, Dehradun and the said amount has to be taken as his expenditure during the check period.
129. Relying upon the letter dated 22.06.2002 received by the IO (PW154) from Puna Club Ltd., Pune and the documents annexed alongwith the same, it was submitted by Ld. PP that accused V.K. Puri had taken membership of this club also and had paid a sum of Rs. 18,777/- as the club charges. The Ld. Defence Counsel argued that since no official of the said club has been examined as a witness, the documents proved in this regard by PW154 in his deposition, cannot be believed and cannot be relied upon. It is true that the prosecution has not examined any witness from the said club. PW154 has deposed that vide aforesaid letter dated 22.06.2002, Puna Club Ltd has sent him the documents related to the membership of accused V.K. Puri. These documents consists of original proposal for election of V.K. Puri as Gymkhana Member of the said Club and three computer print outs reflecting the charges paid by him to the club. From the aforesaid letter dt. 22.06.2002 received by PW154 from the Secretary of the club, it is evident that accused V.K. Puri had been admitted as Gymkhana Member of the Club. However, the three computer print outs annexed with the said letter are not admissible in evidence for the reason that neither are they accompanied by any Certificate under Section 65 of the Evidence Act nor any witness from the Club has been examined to prove the authenticity of these CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 108 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. computer print outs. Therefore, there is no legally admissible documentary evidence to show as to how much charges had been paid by accused V.K. Puri for the membership of the said club.
130. According to the prosecution, the accused V.K. Puri had also taken the membership of Cricket Club of India Ltd., Mumbai. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the letter dt. 22.08.2002 stated to be received by Investigating Officer (PW154) from the Chief Executive and Secretary of the said club, wherein it is stated that V.K. Puri was admitted as a Service Member of the Club w.e.f. 13.11.1992 for a period of 5 years and thereafter his membership was terminated as he had been transferred out of Mumbai. The Letter is Ex. PW-154/Z24. Ironically, the prosecution has chosen not to examine any witness from the said club also to prove the authenticity of the said letter and the expenses incurred by V.K. Puri for the membership of the said club. In the absence of any supporting document to the said letter Ex. PW-154/Z24 and the testimony of any official of the club, the said letter cannot be relied upon to hold that accused V.K. Puri had taken membership of the said club and had incurred any expenses towards its membership.
131. Similar is the situation with regard to the contention of the prosecution that accused V.K. Puri had taken membership of Yashwant Club, Indore. To prove its contention, the prosecution relied upon a letter dt. 23.08.2002 stated to have been received by the then S.P. CBI from the Honarary Secretary of the Club alongwith the photographs of certain documents. Since no witness from the said club has been examined, the authenticity of the contents of these CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 109 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. documents have remained to be established by the prosecution. In the absence of any admissible and trust worthy oral or documentary evidence, it is difficult to hold that the accused V.K. Puri had taken the membership of the said club and incurred any expenses towards the same.
132. The prosecution has thus proved the membership of accused V.K. Puri in only Dehradun Club, Dehradun, where he has sent a sum of Rs. 48,887/- towards the membership charges and other expenses. Accused V.K. Puri himself admitted his membership of Delhi Gymkhana Club where he has stated to have incurred the expenses of Rs. 5,260/-. Hence, the expenditure of accused V.K. Puri towards membership of the clubs during the check period shall have to be taken as Rs. 54,147/- (Rs.48,887/- + Rs.5,260/-).
133. According to the prosecution, the accused have spent a sum of Rs. 2,13,311/- on the education of their daughters in various schools namely Villa Teresa School, Mumbai, Choithram School, Indore, Symbiosis School of Arts, Symbiosis School of Management and National Institute of Fashion and Technology. The accused admitted having spent a sum of Rs. 7,665/- upon the education of their daughters in Symbiosis School of Arts and a sum of Rs. 16,250/- in Symbiosis Institute of Management. It is submitted that the prosecution has not produced any legally admissible evidence to prove that the daughters of the accused were studying in Villa Teresa School, Mumbai, Choithram School, Indore and National Institute of Fashion & Technology and thus it has remained to be proved that any expenditure was incurred by the accused upon the education of their CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 110 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. children in these schools/institutes. It is not disputed that the prosecution has not examined any witness from the aforesaid two schools and National Institute of Fashion & Technology. It is the IO (PW154) who has proved certain letters received by him from these two Schools/Institute to show that the daughters of the accused were studying therein. It is not understandable as to why no witness from these two schools and the institute was summoned and examined by the prosecution. In the absence of the testimony of any official from these two schools/institute, the authenticity of the letters received in this regard by PW154 alongwith the documents annexed with those letters has remained to be proved. This court feels in agreement with the Ld. Counsel for the accused that there is no cogent and trustworthy evidence on record to show that the daughters of the accused had in fact studied in Villa Teresa School, Mumbai, Choithram School, Indore and National Institute of Fashion & Technology. Hence, the expenditure of the accused towards the education of daughters, shall have to be taken as only Rs. 23,915/- (I.e Rs. 7,665/- + Rs. 16,250/-).
134. So far as the expenses incurred by the accused on their foreign visits is concerned, it is not disputed on behalf of the accused that accused Amita Puri had spent Rs. 20,000/- on her trip to United States and a further sum of Rs. 20,000/- during her pilgrimage to Mansarovar. It is also not disputed that their daughter Divya Puri had spent Rs. 28,000/- on her trip to Paris and another daughter Neha Puri has spent Rs. 44,000/- on her trip to Malaysia, Singapore etc. There is no other oral or documentary evidence on record to show any other foreign trip had been undertaken by accused or their dependent CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 111 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. daughters. Thus, the expenses of the accused towards foreign visits have to be taken as Rs. 1,32,000/- (i.e. Rs. 20,000/- + Rs. 40,000/- + Rs. 28,000/- + Rs. 44,000/-).
135. It is the case of the prosecution that accused V.K. Puri had taken loans from Canara Bank, Mumbai and Oriental Bank of Commerce, Mumbai and he has paid total interest in the sum of Rs. 47,701/- on these two loans. However, as rightly argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused, no witness from these two banks have been examined by the prosecution to prove that any such loan was advanced by the banks to accused V.K. Puri and that any interest was paid by him upon repayment of those loans. Similarly, no witness has been examined to show that accused V.K. Puri was having any locker in Oriental Bank of Commerce, Mumbai and that he had paid Rs. 4,700/- as locker charges. It is also the case of the prosecution that accused V.K. Puri has spent Rs. 16,016.32 towards mobile phone bills during the check period. Again no witness from the concerned cellular operator has been examined in this regard. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove the expenditure of the accused towards interest on bank loans, locker charges and mobile phone bills.
136. Hence, total expenditure of the accused during the check period comes to Rs. 15,44,439/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine only).
Discussion on the assets held by the accused at the end of check period.
137. The details of the movable and immovable assets held by the two accused as per prosecution case at the end of the check period CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 112 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. have been already given in Para No. 5 of this Judgment hereinabove and need not be repeated herein again for the sake of brevity. According to the prosecution, the two accused were holding immovable assets worth Rs.20,80,826/- and movable assets worth Rs. 1,35,04,500.56 (total Rs. 1,55,85,326.56/-) at the end of the check period.
138. The immovable assets owned by the accused at the end of the check period are stated to be a house, built upon plot No. 29/4, Circular Road, Dehradun, worth Rs. 9,83,350/-, SFS Flat No. 184, Pocket A, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi worth Rs. 8,99,851/-, plot of land situated in Khasra No. 1/3, Near Airport, Indore, worth Rs. 1,04,000/- and plot of land bearing No. 189 in Central Excise Group Housing Society worth Rs. 93,625/-. The accused do not deny any of these assets but contend that these have been over valued except the Flat at Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, the value of which is admitted as Rs. 8,99,851/-.
139. With regards to the value of the plot and house at Circular Road, Dehradun, it is submitted by Ld. PP that the same was got valued by the Investigating Officer with the assistance of Valuation Officer from Income Tax Department, Meerut and the Valuation Officer in his report, determined the cost on construction of house at Rs. 8 Lakhs. He further argued that admittedly the plot of land has been purchased by the accused for a sum of Rs. 1,83,350/- which is also manifest from various intimations sent by V.K. Puri to his department in this regard and thus, the total value of the plot and the house has been arrived at Rs. 9,83,350/-. However, as rightly pointed out by the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 113 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ld. Defence Counsels, the concerned Valuation Officer has not been examined as a witness at all by the prosecution. Therefore, his report has remained to be proved. In the absence of the testimony of the Valuation Officer, the cost of construction of the house cannot be held to be Rs. 8 Lakhs. As per the intimations sent by accused V.K. Puri in this regard to his department, the total cost of construction comes to Rs. 5.8 Lakhs. Therefore, the total value of the plot and the house has to be taken as Rs. 7,63,350/- (i.e Rs. 5,80,000/- + Rs. 1,83,350/-).
140. The value of the SFS Flat at Sarita Vihar, New Delhi is not disputed on behalf of the accused. So far as the plot situated in Khasra No. 1/3, Near Airport, Indore, is concerned, its value has been shown in the chagesheet as Rs. 1,04,000/-. PW109, the witness examined by the prosecution itself has deposed that his wife Smt. Suchita Gupta has sold the said plot of land to Amita Puri for a sum of Rs. 90,000/-. Therefore, it is not understandable as to on what basis has the value of this plot been taken as Rs. 1,04,000/-. Its value shall have to be taken as Rs. 90,000/- only, as contended by the accused.
141. Even though the value of the plot of the accused in Central Excise Group Housing Society taken as Rs. 93,625/-, the Investigating Officer (PW154) has admitted in his cross-examination that the value of the said plot is Rs. 90,025/-. Therefore, the value of the same has to be taken as Rs. 90,025/- only.
142. Thus, the total value of the immovable assets owned by the accused at the end of the check period shall have to be taken as Rs. 18,43,226/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Three Thousand Two CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 114 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Hundred & Twenty Six only) (i.e. Rs.7,63,350/- + Rs.8,99,851/- + Rs.90,000/- + Rs.90,025/-).
143. The movable assets stated to be possessed and owned by the accused at the end of the check period include deposits in various bank accounts, investments/deposits with various private companies, bonds of various companies, units issued by Unit Trust of India, Kissan Vikas Patras, MIS deposits with Post Office and the cost of movables like car, scooter, computer, telephone, washing machine, television etc. The accused do not dispute that they were holding ICICI bonds worth Rs. 2,20,000/-, bonds of SHCIL worth Rs. 5,75,000/-, Kissan Vikas Patras worth Rs. 2,00,000/- and MIS deposits with Post Office worth Rs. 1,96,000/- at the end of the check period. It is also not disputed that they were in possession of a scooter of make Kinetic worth Rs. 35,827/-, computer worth Rs. 43,250/-, air conditioner worth Rs. 23,730/-, washing machine worth Rs. 10,350/- and colour television worth Rs. 16,270/- at the end of the check period.
144. So far as the units of UTI worth Rs. 60,000/- are concerned, it is submitted on behalf of accused that there is no evidence on record to show that these units were held by the accused. It is pointed out that the documents related to these units are D-160, D-161 and D-261 to D-265. It is argued that D-160 is a covering letter and D-161 are the photocopies of the application forms which have not been proved by any witness at all. The Ld. Defence Counsel stated that only the covering letter D-160 has been marked as Ex. PW-154/O during the deposition of the IO (PW-154). No witness from the trust has been CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 115 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. examined to substantiate these documents. It is further pointed out that D-261 is another covering letter whereas D-262 to D-265 are original application forms. One witness PW145 has been examined in this regard, who has only proved the covering letter as Ex. PW-145/A but did not prove the application forms as he had no personal knowledge about those and had not dealt with units as mentioned therein. It is thus argued that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused were holding units worth Rs. 60,000/- as on 22.02.2002.
145. The submission of the Ld. Counsel for the accused appear to be partly correct on perusal of the record. No witness from UTI has been examined by the prosecution to prove the investments reflected in documents D-160 & D-161, stated to have been made by accused V.K. Puri in his name and in the name of his family members in the trust. Such investments cannot be taken to have been proved only on the basis of the letter Ex. PW-154/O which is stated to have been sent by UTI to the IO (PW154) and which has been proved by IO during his deposition. In the absence of any witness from UTI, the authenticity of the letter and the contents thereof have remained to be proved. Therefore, there is no legally admissible evidence on record to show that the accused V.K. Puri and his family members were holding units with UTI as stated in the aforesaid letter Ex. PW-154/O.
146. Vide letter dt. 14.10.2002 (D-261), Sh. I. Joseph, the Assistant Vice President of UTI Investor Services Ltd had informed the IO that V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Divya Puri and Neha Puri had invested in 1000 Units in UTI having face value of Rs. 10/- each and accordingly, 1000 units each were issued to them. He has been examined as PW-145 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 116 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. and has proved the said letter as Ex. PW-145/A. Alongwith this letter, he had also enclosed the original applications submitted by these four for purchasing units in the Scheme MIP 98 (III). PW-145 has also deposed that he had sent the aforesaid information to CBI through letter Ex. PW-145/A after checking the record. The date mentioned on the original applications annexed with the aforesaid letter of PW-145 is 11.03.1998.
147. It is, therefore, manifest from the testimony of PW-145 and the documents proved by him that accused V.K. Puri, his wife Amita Puri and their two daughters Neha Puri and Divya Puri had applied for 1000 Units each in the Scheme MIP 98 (III) in the month of March, 1998 and had been alloted these Units for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each. Thus they were possessing the Units of UTI related to aforesaid Scheme worth Rs. 40,000/- in total at the end of the check period. It may be noted here that this was the price at which the Units were alloted to them in the year 1998 and the actual price at the end of the check period i.e. 22.02.2002 may have been much higher but no evidence has been led by the prosecution to prove the actual value of these Units as on the said date.
148. Thus, as per the evidence on record, the accused were holding Units worth Rs. 40,000/- only as on 22.02.2002.
149. As regards, the IDBI bonds worth Rs. 95,000/-, it is argued that there is no document on record to show that the accused had made any such investment. It needs to note here that the accused Vijay Kumar Puri has himself admitted that he had invested an amount of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 117 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Rs. 10,000/- in IDBI bonds. In the absence of any evidence on record, the accused shall have to be taken as holding IDBI Bonds worth only Rs. 10,000/- at the end of the check period.
150. It is not disputed that the accused Vijay Kumar Puri owned a Premier Padmini Car at the end of the Check Period but its value as mentioned in the chargesheet is vehemently disputed. The prosecution has valued the car for Rs. 72,498/- at the end of the check period. It is submitted that accused Vijay Kumar Puri had purchased the said car in the year 1987 for Rs. 79,498/- and thus it was 15 years old at the end of the check period. It is further argued that the car being of very old model, it had not market value and ultimately was sold by accused Vijay Kumar Puri in the first week of March, 2002 for Rs. 8,000/-. He has deposed about the same while appearing as DW10 in his defence. Hence, it is submitted that the value of the car at the end of check period should be taken as Rs. 8,000/- only. For the reason that its value had enormously depreciated during the last 15 years after its purchase and also on account of the fact that just after 15 days of the end of the check period, the car fetched only Rs. 8,000/-, the value of this asset at the end of the check period can't be taken more than Rs. 8,000/-.
151. According to the prosecution, the accused were having other household articles worth Rs. 6,17,277/- at the end of the check period. Admittedly, there is no break up of this amount anywhere in the entire chargesheet. It was submitted by Ld. PP that this amount represents the total value of the articles which were found in the possession of the accused at their residence in Pune during the search conducted CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 118 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. on 22.02.2002. He also pointed out that the price of each article found at the residence of the accused has been mentioned separately in the inventory Ex. PW-7/B which was prepared at the spot by the IO in presence of three independent witnesses as well as accused Amita Puri who was present in the house at that time. It was argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that the said inventory Ex. PW-7/B is not admissible in law for the reason that it bears the signature of one of the accused i.e Amita Puri and therefore, is hit by Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also argued that the list does not reflect the actual market value of the goods as on date of the search and therefore, the value of the goods shown therein has to be disregarded.
152. Perusal of the said inventory Ex. PW-7/B shows that the search had been conducted by the IO in presence of three independent witnesses namely S.N. Kamble, Sudhir Pawar and Mrs. Neeta Shewade. All the three witnesses were officials working in Bank of Maharashtra, Pune. One of them namely Sudhir Pawar has been examined as PW7 by the prosecution. He has deposed that he alongwith two other officials of Bank of Maharashtra namely Mrs. Neeta Shewade and Mr. Shanta Ram N. Kamble had accompanied CBI team to the residence of V.K. Puri in Central Excise Colony, Pune. Wife and daughters of V.K. Puri were present in the house at that time. He deposed that search was conducted by the CBI team and certain documents were seized during the search vide seizure memo Ex. PW- 7/A. He further stated that an inventory of the articles found in the house was prepared at the spot which he proved as Ex. PW-7/B. He identified his signatures at Point A, on Page Nos. 1 & 7 as well as his CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 119 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. initials at Point A2 on Page Nos. 2 to 6 of the said inventory. He further deposed that the year of acquisition of these items and their price was mentioned in the said inventory as was told by accused Amita Puri. In the cross-examination, he deposed that accused Amita Puri had accompanied the search party to each and every room whereas her daughter kept sitting in the hall for sometime. He denied the suggestion that the valuation of the articles as shown in the inventory was not told by accused Amita Puri or that the same was mentioned by the IO on his own. Thus there is nothing in the cross- examination to discredit this witness or to disbelieve him.
153. Accused Amita Puri appearing as DW-9 has herself also deposed that CBI Officials had conducted search at their residence on 22.02.2002 which was started at 5.00 PM and continued till 11.00 PM or 12.00 Midnight. She admits that she was present in the house at that time and further stated that her daughter Neha Puri reached the house at about 5.30 PM but left again at 6.00 PM for her coaching classes. She deposed that the CBI officials prepared inventory of the articles recovered by them as well as seizure memo on their own and took her signatures on 3 or 4 papers which had something in writing but she did not go through those papers as she was under
tremendous shock and pressure on account of the CBI raid.
154. The testimony of PW-7 clearly reveals that the search was conducted by the CBI at the residence of the accused in Pune in the presence of three independent witnesses. The factum of search and the recovery of various articles during the process is admitted by DW9 herself who was present in the house during the entire search. Even CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 120 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. though she has deposed that the inventory of the articles was prepared by CBI Officials on their own, it is evident from the testimony of PW7 that the value of the articles mentioned in the inventory Ex.
PW-7/B was told to IO by accused Amita Puri herself. The IO (PW154) has also deposed that the value of household articles mentioned in the chargesheet as Rs. 6,17,277/- has been derived from the said inventory Ex. PW-7/B. Accused Amita Puri (DW-9) has nowhere deposed that no such articles as mentioned in the said inventory were found in their house during the search or that the value of these articles mentioned in the inventory is not correct or that these have been overvalued. She admits that she had signed the said inventory. Mere fact that she has signed the inventory does not make this document inadmissible in view of Section 162 Cr. PC as argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused. The said inventory cannot be taken to be a statement of Amita Puri recorded by the IO U/s 161 Cr. PC. In the cases involving disproportionate assets of a public servant, it is the duty of the IO to enquire from the accused Public Servant or his family members about the date of acquisition of the assets found in their possession at the end of the check period and the value of those assets. This is precisely what appears to have been asked from Amita Puri during the search. The IO was not recording her statement U/s 161 Cr. PC and hence the question of bar U/s 162 Cr. PC does not arise at all.
155. Thus, the evidence on record is sufficient to hold that the accused were possessing household articles worth Rs. 6,17,277/- at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 121 of 197156. As per the prosecution case, the accused were holding deposits in various banks worth Rs. 80,45,982.56 and investments/deposits in various private banks to the tune of Rs. 32,90,316/- at the end of the check period. Both these figures have been vehemently disputed on behalf of the accused. They have argued that the prosecution has not led any legally admissible evidence to prove that these deposits/investments were made by them. Thus, it would be necessary to deal with each such deposits/investments in order to ascertain whether the evidence on record is sufficient to prove that these were made by the accused.
157. The details of the investments stated to have been made by accused V.K. Puri in his name and in the name of his family members during the check period in various banks and which are counted as assets in their hands at the end of the check period have been mentioned in the table reproduced in Para No. 7 hereinabove. It being a long table spanning over 9 pages, is not reproduced here again in order to avoid unnecessary burden of pages in this Judgment. Instead, it would be proper to take the investments serial wise from the said table for discussion hereunder. It may be noted here that a common objection was raised by the Ld. Counsels for the accused with regards to the documents produced and proved by the witnesses from banks/private companies to the effect that the statements of accounts cannot be read in evidence in the absence of a proper certificate U/s 2(8) of Banker's Books Evidence Act. This court has noticed that some of the statements of accounts proved by the bank witnesses are not accompanied by such certificate U/s 2(8) of Banker's Books Evidence Act, whereas some of the statements of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 122 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. accounts are accompanied by such certificate but the same is not in the manner and in the words as provided in Section 2(8) of Banker's Books Evidence Act. In this regard, it is found apposite to refer to a judgment of the High Court of Bombay reported as Radheshyam vs. Safiyabai Ibrahim, AIR 1988 Bombay 361, in which it was observed as follows:-
" In my judgment, the aforesaid view of the Ld. Judge of the Lower Appellate Court was hypothetical. The said extract of account was duly signed by the agent of the bank. Implicit in it was a certificate that it was a true copy of an entry contained in one of the ordinary books of the bank and was made in the usual and ordinary course of business and that such book was in the custody of the bank. The detailed ingredients mentioned in the defining class 8 of Section 2 of the Banker's Books Evidence Act 1891 for qualifying to be "Certified Copy" are not mandatory but merely directory. Sufficient compliance depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case is enough to qualifying a document to be "certified copy". I, therefore, hold that the said extract of the accounts produced at Exh.55A is admissible in evidence."
158. The Kerala High Court also in T.V. Rajan vs. A.S. Sharafudheen, III (2003) BC 263 accepted the aforesaid view of the Bombay High Court that Section 2 (8) of the Banker's Books Evidence Act is only directory and not mandatory. It was also held that the non/ inadequate compliance of this provision was of no substance at all if it had not resulted in any prejudice.
159. It also needs to be kept in mind here, as was argued by Ld. PP, that in their depositions before this court on the basis of the record from their respective banks, the bank witnesses were accepting the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 123 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. liability of the banks towards its customers. It is not a case where the witnesses from the bank had appeared to prove the documents in order to fasten liability upon any of its customers in the shape of a loan, credit facility etc. In these circumstances, it would be difficult to fathom that these banks or the witnesses appearing on their behalf would fabricate or manipulate any entries in their records which would expose the bank to a financial liability towards its customers.
160. Now, let me proceed to discuss the purported investments of the accused in various banks serial wise from the table mentioned in paragraph no. 7 hereinabove in order to ascertain as to how many of those have been duly proved so as to be considered as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 1, 2 & 3These relate to the purported investments made by accused V.K. Puri and Amita Puri by way of FDRs and a saving account in HDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai. The IO (PW154) has proved certain documents relating to these investments i.e. original Account Opening Form. The Original FDRs are not on record. The Statement relating to the Saving Bank Account in the name of V.K. Puri bearing No. 0051000001019 is only a computer copy not accompanied by either Certificate U/s 65B of the evidence Act or under Bankers' Books Evidence Act. No witness from the bank has been examined by the prosecution to prove these investments. Therefore, there is no legally admissible evidence to hold that the accused had invested any money in the said bank.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 124 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 4, 5 & 6 The accused V.K. Puri is stated to have deposited Rs. 45,000/- in his name and similar amount in the name of his wife Amita Puri by way of two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- each in HDFC Bank Limited, Pune. Serial No. 6 reflects an amount of Rs. 1,32,141.09 as balance in the saving account in the name of V.K. Puri in the said bank as on 22.02.2002. A witness from the said bank has been examined as PW147. He has proved two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 48,000/- each as Ex. PW-147/C and Ex. PW-147/D, which are in joint name of the two accused. So far as the saving account is concerned, he neither produced nor proved its statement duly certified under Banker's Books Evidence Act. Hence, the investments made by the accused in this bank during the check period shall have to be taken as Rs. 96,000/- only. Ld. Counsel for the accused had argued that the testimony of this witness cannot be believed as she has admitted that she did not know the accused and had never dealt with the aforesaid FDRs. The submissions of the Ld. Counsel has no force. PW147 was the employee of the concerned bank and has proved the original record of the bank. The record proved by her cannot be disregarded or disbelieved merely for the reason that she had not dealt with the same in the bank. It would be difficult for any bank to prove its records relating to any account in the court, if this requirement is insisted upon, for the reason that the bank officials who had dealt with the FDRs or the saving account in question, may have retired or left the services of the bank or expired. It would be enough if any official of the bank produced or proved the original record before CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 125 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the court or its copies duly certified U/s 65B of the Evidence Act and under Banker's Books Evidence Act. Thus, it is proved that the accused were having movable asset in the form of these two FDRs at the end of the check period, having the principal value of Rs. 96,000/- in total.
Serial No. 7With regards to the FDR in the amount of Rs. 42,000/- in HDFC Bank, New Delhi, as mentioned at Serial No. 7 of the table, the witness of the bank has appeared as PW3 and proved the original application submitted by accused V.K. Puri. It shows that he had deposited Rs. 48,000/- in cash and got an FDR with the maturity period of three years. The same is Ex. PW-3/B. It was done on 04.09.1998 and thereafter, was renewed for the same period again. It is thus proved that the accused V.K. Puri had invested Rs. 48,000/- in this bank during the check period by taking an FDR in the principal amount of Rs. 48,000/- against cash payment. Hence, this FDR was an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 8 & 9According to the prosecution, the accused had taken two FDRs in sum of Rs. 48,000/- each in HDFC Bank, Pune. PW53 has appeared as a witness from the bank. He had handed over the relevant documents to the investigating officer vide seizure memo dt. 21.06.2002 Ex. PW-53/A. He has proved the two duplicate copies/renewal advices related to the FDRs in sum of Rs. 48,000/- each Ex. PW-53/F and Ex. PW-53/H in the name of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 126 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. V.K. Puri and Amita Puri respectively. He has deposed that vide these documents Ex. PW-53/F & Ex. PW-53/H, term deposits were made for an amount of Rs. 48,000/- each for 60 months with maturity date as 10.09.2003. Thus, it is proved that investment worth Rs. 96,000/- in total was made in the name of two accused in the said bank vide aforesaid two FDRs during the check period and the FDRs were alive at the end of the check period and thus available as a movable asset in the hands of the accused.
Serial No. 10This is stated to be an FDR in the name of Neha Puri D/o V.K. Puri in the same bank i.e. HDFC Bank, Pune for an amount of Rs. 65,381.28. PW53 has proved the duplicate copy of deposit confirmation/renewal advice related to the said FDR as Ex. PW53/G, which shows that the amount was deposited in the bank and the FD was created on 10.04.2002 i.e after the end of the check period. Therefore, this FDR cannot be taken to be an asset of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 11 & 12These relate to the two FDRs stated to be in the name of accused V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the amount of Rs. 43,000/- each in Standard Chartered Bank, M.G. Road, Mumbai. PW144 has appeared from the said bank. He has only proved two letters dt. 08.05.2002 & 28.08.2002 (Ex. PW-144/A & Ex. PW- 144/B respectively), whereby he had provided some information to the CBI with regards to the two FDRs in the name of Amita CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 127 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Puri and V.K. Puri having a maturity value as Rs. 43,896.10 each. Neither the original FDRs nor any application submitted by the two accused to the bank for making these FDRs, is on record. PW144 has deposed in his cross-examination that his testimony is based upon the aforesaid two letters only. He had no personal knowledge about these FDRs. Therefore, there is no cogent and believable evidence on record to hold that any such amount was invested by the two accused in the said bank by way of these FDRs or that any such FDR was alive at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 13 to 22According to prosecution, there were four saving accounts and four PPF accounts in the name of Amita Puri, Neha Puri, Divya Puri and V.K. Puri and also two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- each in their names in Union Bank of India, Mumbai. PW140 has appeared from the said bank. He had sent details of these saving accounts, PPF accounts and FDRs to CBI vide his letter dt. 21.03.2002 Ex. PW-140/B. He has proved the account opening forms for saving accounts as Ex. PW-140/C to Ex. PW-140/F, account opening forms for PPF accounts as Ex. PW-140/G to Ex. PW-140/J and account opening forms for the two FDRs in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri as Ex. PW- 140/K and Ex. PW-140/L. He has also proved the statement of accounts pertaining to the four saving accounts in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri as Ex. PW-140/M to Ex. PW-140/P and the statement of accounts pertaining to the four PPF CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 128 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. accounts in their names separately as Ex. PW-140/Q to Ex. PW- 140/T. It is true that these statements do not bear a proper certificate U/s 2 (8) of Banker's Books Evidence Act and an objection in this regard was raised on behalf of the accused during the testimony of this witness. However, each of these statements has been verified by a bank official with the original and also bear the seal of the bank on each page. Further, it has not been suggested to this witness PW140 that these saving accounts and PPF accounts did not belong to the accused and their two daughters or that the entries contained therein are not correct. In view of the same and also relying upon the above noted two judgments of the Bombay High Court and Kerala High Court, no merit is found in the objection raised on behalf of the accused. These statements are held to be admissible in evidence. Thus, it is proved on the basis of these statements that these saving accounts and PPF accounts belong to the accused and their daughters and were having credit balance at the end of the check period as under:-
(i) SB A/c No.6583 in the name of V.K. Puri - Rs. 2,366.69
(ii)SB A/c No.6581 in the name of Amita Puri - Rs. 9,378.73
(iii)SB A/c No.6663 in the name of Neha Puri - Rs. 3,134.74
(iv)SB A/c No.6664 in the name of Divya Puri - Rs. 28,768.00
(v)PPF A/c No.429 in the name of V.K. Puri - Rs. 4,06,175.00
(vi)PPF A/c No.444 in the name of Neha Puri - Rs. 3,35,999.00
(vii)PPF A/c No.445 in the name of Divya Puri - Rs. 3,35,790.00
(viii)PPF A/c No.446 in the name of Amita Puri - Rs. 5,11,987.00 Total = Rs.16,33,599.16 Thus, an amount of Rs.16,33,599.16/- was lying to the credit of accused V.K. Puri, Amita Puri and their two daughters in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 129 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. these saving accounts and PPF accounts at the end of the check period and shall have to be taken as an asset in their hands.
So far as the account opening forms Ex. PW-140/K & Ex. PW-140/L related to the two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- each in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri are concerned, these show that the FDRs were created on 02.09.1995 with maturity period of 3 years. There is nothing in these two forms to show that the FDRs were renewed for any further period in the year 1998 on the expiry of the initial maturity period. Therefore, there being no evidence to show that these FDRs were live at the end of the check period, the amount invested therein cannot be considered.
Serial No. 23This relates to the saving bank account in the name of accused Amita Puri in Union Bank of India, Mumbai. It is stated that there was a balance of Rs. 18,190.63 in the said account at the end of the check period. This is admitted on behalf of the accused and hence the amount of Rs. 18,190.63 is to be taken as a movable asset in their hands at the end of check period.
Serial No. 24 & 25According to the prosecution, the accused had obtained two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- each in the name of Amita Puri in Union Bank of India, Mumbai. PW5 had appeared as a witness from the said bank. He proved that two applications for opening of two FDRs in the name of Amita Puri in the sum of Rs.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 130 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 40,000/- each as Ex. PW-5/F and Ex. PW-5/G. He identified the signatures of the concerned bank official Mr. Pesi at Point A on these applications, who had dealt with these. Perusal of these applications shows that the two FDRs were created in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- each in the name of Amita Puri on 17.04.2000 with the maturity period of 3 years. It is thus evident that the FDRs were live at the end of the check period in the year 2002. Once the signatures of Mr. Pesi, who had dealt with these applications, have been identified by PW5, the arguments raised on behalf of the accused that since Mr. Pesi has not been examined as a witness these applications cannot be considered, do not have any merit. Further, no suggestion has been given to this witness that these two FDRs were not created at the request of accused Amita Puri or that these do not belong to her. Hence, the amount of Rs. 80,000/- representing the value of these two FDRs qualifies as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 26This pertains to the saving account No. 073010100036847 in the name of V.K. Puri in UTI Bank, Pune, in which there was a balance of Rs. 1,22,506/- at the end of the check period. Computer Print Out of the statement of account of the same is on record and has been proved by PW4 as Ex.PW- 4/H. He has deposed that this statement was issued by another bank official Mr. Dandekar and has identified the signature of Mr. Dandekar at Point A on the same. However, it is evident from his testimony that neither had he taken the print out of the said CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 131 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. statement nor was he aware as to who had taken the print out from the computer. This computerized statement Ex. PW-4/H is not accompanied by any certificate of any bank official under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. Mr. Dandekar has not been examined as a witness. Hence, this document has not been proved as per law and thus cannot be relied upon.
Serial Nos. 27 to 31, 34 to 37, 39, 45 & 55Serial No. 27 relates to a Term Deposit No. 7641 in the name of V.K. Puri and Divya Puri for Rs. 75,000/-, Serial No. 28 relates to a Term Deposit No. 7658 in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri for Rs. 80,000/-, Serial No. 29 relates to a Term Deposit No. 7672 in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri for Rs. 75,000/-, Serial No. 30 relates to a Term Deposit No. 7689 in the name of V.K. Puri and Neha Puri for Rs. 75,000/- and serial No. 31 relates to a Term Deposit No. 7696 in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri for Rs. 80,000/-. All these having admitted by the accused. Thus, the total amount of TDRs i.e. Rs. 3,85,000/- has to be added to the assets of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 34 relates to a fixed deposit bearing No. 50720010000006 in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri, Serial No. 35 relates to a fixed deposit bearing No. 50720010000034 in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri, Serial No. 36 relates to a fixed deposit bearing No. 50720010000007 in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and Neha Puri, Serial No. 37 relates to a fixed deposit bearing No. 50720010000009 in the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 132 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri and Serial No. 39 relates to a fixed deposit bearing No. 50720010000026 in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and Divya Puri, in Bank of Maharashtra, Pune. All these have been admitted on behalf of the accused. Therefore, the total value of these FDRs i.e Rs. 2,35,000/- has to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 45 refers to the saving account in the name of V.K. Puri in Bank of India, Mumbai, which had a balance of Rs. 90,519.53 at the end of the check period. This too is admitted by the accused and therefore, this amount of Rs. 90,519.53 has to be added to the assets of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 55 relates to saving bank account no. 64921 in the name of V.K. Puri in PNB, Paltan Bazar, Dehradun, which was having balance of Rs. 94,193.5 at the end of the check period. This too is admitted by the accused and hence, this amount of Rs. 94,193.5 has to be added to the assets of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 32, 33, 43 & 48These relate to various saving accounts in the name of the accused in State Bank of India and Central Bank of India. However, it was found that there was zero balance in these accounts at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 133 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 38, 40, 41 & 42 These refer to the four saving bank accounts. One account bearing No. 50720000000002 is in the name of V.K. Puri and the closing balance in the same at the end of the check period was Rs. 86,374.82. Another account bearing No. 50720000000003 is in the name of Amita Puri and the closing balance in the same at the end of the check period was Rs. 5089.18. The third account bearing No. 50720000000004 is in the name of Neha Puri and the closing balance in the same at the end of the check period was Rs. 8844.62. The last account bearing no. 50720000000005 is in the name of Divya Puri and the closing balance in the same at the end of the check period was Rs. 25,056.05. PW49 has appeared on behalf of the bank. He has proved the certified copies of the statements of all these four accounts as Ex. PW-49/G (Colly.), Ex. PW-49/H (Colly.), Ex. PW-49/J (Colly.) & Ex. PW-49/K (Colly.) respectively. He has deposed that these statements bear the seal of the bank and his signature at Point A on all the pages.
It was argued by Ld. Counsel for the accused that these statements cannot be considered as these are neither accompanied with a Certificate U/s 2 (8) of Bankers' Books Evidence Act nor a Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. This court does not feel impressed by these arguments. No objection was taken during the testimony of PW49 when these statements were tendered in evidence and exhibit mark put upon them. Even there is no cross-examination at all of this witness on behalf of the accused. Had he been cross examined and an objection taken with regards to the mode of proof of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 134 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. these statements, the prosecution may have taken steps to remove the deficiency/lacuna. Having remained silent at the time of the recording of the testimony of the PW49, the accused cannot be heard now to object to the documents proved by him. Further, since the statements have come from the bank and had been duly signed by the bank official PW49 and also bear the seal of the bank, the strict compliance of the provisions of Section 2(8) of Bankers' Books Evidence Act need not be insisted upon in view of the judgments of Bombay High Court and Kerala High Court noted hereinabove.
Therefore, a total sum of Rs. 1,25,364.67 reflecting the closing balance in these four saving accounts at the end of the check period has to be added to the assets of the accused.
Serial No. 44This relates to saving bank account in the name of Amita Puri in State Bank of India, Indore and is stated to be having balance in the sum of Rs. 679.99 at the end of the check period. The statement of account pertaining to the same has not been proved as per law and hence, the balance lying therein cannot be considered.
Serial No. 46This refers to saving bank account No. 6706 in the name of V.K. Puri in Canara Bank, Gole Market, New Delhi. Closing Balance of Rs. 1758.22 was found in this account at the end of the check period. The statement pertaining to this account has been proved by PW13 as Ex. PW-13/C. This is a computerized CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 135 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. statement not accompanied by either Certificate U/s 2 (8) of Bankers' Books Evidence Act or Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act. PW13 has deposed that he has no personal knowledge about the contents of this statement and he does not know who had retrieved this statement from the computer. Hence, this statement has not been proved as per law. The balance lying in this account cannot be taken to be an investment by the accused.
Serial No. 47This pertains to an FDR in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri in Canara Bank, Gole Market, New Delhi. PW13 has proved the original account opening form of the said FDR as Ex. PW-13/A. He was a Senior Manager of the branch in the year 2001 and had authorized the opening of this account. He further deposed that the application bears his signature at Point A. He also identified the signature of the then Manager V. Vishwanathan at Point B on the same. Perusal of the application Ex. PW-13/A shows that an FDR in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- was created in the name of V.K. Puri on 27.08.2001 with maturity period of 3 years. PW13 has deposed that there is an endorsement to this effect in his handwriting at Point Y on the said application. He has not been cross-examined at all on behalf of the accused. Hence, there is cogent and reliable evidence on record to show that accused V.K. Puri had created an FDR in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- in this bank on 27.08.2001. Thus, this amount of Rs. 42,000/- represents an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 136 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 49 This relates to saving bank account no. 32577 in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in Central Bank of India, Delhi. However, no document related to the said account has been proved by the prosecution.
Serial No. 50This also relates to another saving bank account no. 36059 in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in Central Bank of India, Delhi. Its statement of account proved by PW2 as Ex. PW-2/K2 is a computerized statement not accompanied by the requisite certificates under Bankers's Books Evidence Act and Indian Evidence Act. Hence, same cannot be considered at all.
Serial No. 51, 52, 91 & 92These relate to four FDRs in Central Bank, Parliament Street, New Delhi. PW2 had appeared from the Bank and has proved these FDRs. He has proved FDR bearing No. 46201 in sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of Amita Puri as Ex. PW-2/F, FDR bearing No. 46236 in sum of Rs. 23,000/- in the name of Neha Puri as Ex. PW-2/G, FDR bearing No. 104554 in sum of Rs. 40,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri as Ex. PW-2/H and FDR bearing No. 104362 in sum of Rs. 40,000/- in the name of Amita Puri as Ex. PW-2/I. He has deposed that all these four FDRs were existing as on 22.02.2002. In the cross-examination, he had deposed that he believed these documents to be genuine as the same had been taken out from the records of the bank. There is nothing in his deposition to disbelieve his testimony or CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 137 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the documents proved by him. These FDRs have come from a genuine source i.e the bank and cannot be ignored in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. It is, therefore, held that a sum of Rs. 1,53,000/- i.e the total principal amount of these four FDRs was one of the assets in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 53 & 54This relate to two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- each in Central Bank of India, Dehradun. PW16 has appeared from the bank. He has proved the FDR No. 53/297 in the name of V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- as Ex. PW-16/B3 and FDR No. 53/298 in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- in the name of Divya Puri under the guardianship of Amita Puri as Ex. PW-16/B5. Both these FDRs were created on 02.05.1998 with maturity period of 3 years and thereafter were renewed for a further period of 3 years. Endorsement to this effect is on the reverse of these FDRs. The witness PW16 has not been cross-examined on the aspect of renewal of the FDRs. Therefore, it is evident that the FDRs were alive at the end of the check period in the year 2002. Thus, the principal amount of these two FDRs i.e. Rs. 80,000/- shall be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 56 to 58Serial No. 56 and Serial No. 57 relate to two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- & Rs. 50,000/- respectively in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri respectively, in Punjab National Bank, CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 138 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Paltan Bazar, Dehradun. PW17 has appeared from the bank. He has proved the documents pertaining to these two FDRs which show that these were created in the year 1993. There is no evidence to show that these were alive at the end of the check period in the year 2002. Hence, the amount reflected in these two FDRs cannot be taken to be an investment of the accused during the check period.
Serial No. 58 relates to saving bank account No. 67140 in the name of Amita Puri in the same bank. PW17 has proved its statement of account as Ex. PW-17/A-5. This statement bears a Certificate bearing the signature of PW17 alongwith the seal of the bank at Point A. Even though, the certificate is not verbatim in the words used in Section 2(8) of Bankers' Books Evidence Act, the deficiency has to be disregarded in view of the judgments of the Bombay High Court and Kerala High Court noted hereinabove. Hence, the balance in the said account at the end of the check period has Rs. 1973/- has to be regarded as an asset with the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 59This relates to the saving bank account in the name of Amita Puri in State Bank of India, Pune. The computerized statement of this account has been proved by the IO as Ex. PW- 154/Z36. It is not accompanied by the requisite certificates under Bankers' Books Evidence Act and Indian Evidence Act. No witness from the bank has been examined. Hence, the same has to be disregarded.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 139 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 60 to 62 These relate to three TDRs in the amount of Rs. 42,000/- each in the name of Neha Puri, Amita Puri and V.K. Puri respectively in State Bank of India, Pune. PW137 has appeared form the bank. He has only proved the seizure memo vide which he had handed over the documents related to these TDRs to the IO. The documents had been proved by the IO as Ex. PW-154/Z36 (Colly.). The requisite certificates under Bankers' Books Evidence Act and Indian Evidence Act have not been filed. No bank witness has deposed regarding these TDRs. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 63 to 65Serial No. 63 and Serial No. 64 relate to two FDRs in the name of V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each. These have been proved by the bank witness PW20 as Ex. PW-20/A and Ex. PW-20/B. Perusal of these FDRs shows that these were created on 07.03.1994 with the maturity period of 3 years. There is no evidence to show that these had been renewed in the year 1997. Hence, there is nothing on record to show that these were alive at the end of the check period in the year 2002 and have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 65 relates to saving bank account No. 6306 in the joint name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the same bank. Its accounts opening form and the statement of account have been proved by PW20 as Ex. PW-20/H and Ex. PW-20/G respectively. The statement bears a certificate under Bankers' Books Evidence Act issued by PW20. Hence, the balance in this CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 140 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. account as Rs. 24,362/- at the end of the check period as reflected in the aforesaid statement shall be taken as investment made by the accused during the check period and an asset in their hands at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 66 to 72The serial numbers 66 & 67 relate to the two saving bank accounts in Bank of Maharashtra, Dehradun. PW21 has appeared from the bank. He has proved the statement of the account No. 984 in the name of Amita Puri as Ex. PW-21/F32 which shows a balance of Rs. 860/- at the end of the check period. He has also proved the statement of the account No. 1328 in the name of V.K. Puri as Ex. PW-21/F33 which shows a balance of Rs. 14,408.5 at the end of the check period. Both these statements are duly certified under Bankers' Books Evidence Act bearing the signature of the bank official at Point A which was identified by PW21. Therefore, the total amount of Rs. 15,392.5 reflecting the balance in these two accounts shall be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
So far as Serial Nos. 68 to 72 are concerned, these relate to five cumulative deposit receipts in the name of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri and their two daughters. PW21 has proved only a computerized list of the CDRs. The CDRs which are on record had matured in the year 1991. There is no evidence to show that these were alive at the end of the check period in the year 2002. Hence, the amount reflected in the CDRs cannot be taken to be an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 141 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the check period.
Serial No. 73This is an FDR in the name of V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- in Bank of Maharashtra, Delhi. PW124 has appeared from the bank and has proved only a credit voucher Ex. PW- 124/B and a Debit Voucher Ex. PW-124/C. No FDR is on record. There is a statement of account on record as a part of D-37 which has not been proved either by PW124 or any other witness from the bank. Hence, there is no evidence to show that accused V.K. Puri had invested any money in such FDR during the check period.
Serial No. 74This relates to saving account no. 15337 in joint name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in Bank of Maharashtra, Dehradun. Statements of this account has been proved by PW23 as Ex. PW-23/C1 and Ex. PW-23/C2. These have been duly certified under Bankers' Books Evidence Act by PW23 and bear his seal as well as his signature. The accused had admitted their photographs on the Account Opening Forms. It is thus amply proved that these two accused were maintaining the said saving account. The statements show a balance of Rs. 28,470.2 in the same at the end of the check period. Therefore, this amount shall have to be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 142 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 75 to 76 These are stated to be two TDRs in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- and Rs.50,000/- respectively. Neither are the account opening forms related to these TDRs on record nor original TDRs. PW23 who had appeared from the bank had proved some other TDRs in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each which had matured in the year 1998. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused had obtained any such TDRs during the check period or that these were alive at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 77 to 80Serial No. 77 relates to a saving account bearing No. 000401001900 in the joint name of V.K. puri and Amita Puri in ICICI Bank Limited, Mumbai. The computerized Statements of Account pertaining to the same have been have been proved by PW106 as Ex. PW-106/H (Colly.) but it is not supported by any Certificate under Bankers' Books Evidnce Act or under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act. PW106 has deposed in his cross- examination that the said statement does not bear his signature and its print out was not taken by him. In the absence of a duly proved statement of this account, the balance lying in the same cannot be held to be an asset at the hand of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 78, 79 & 80 are three FDRs. Original FDRs are on record and have been proved by PW134 as Ex. PW-134/C (Colly.). FDR No. 000415235455 in the principal amount of Rs. 69,643/- is in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri. FDR No. CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 143 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 000415235454 in the sum of Rs. 69,643/- is also in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri. Both were created on 26.04.2001 with maturity period of 5 years and thus were due on 26.04.2006. The third FDR bearing No. 0415085 is in the sum of Rs. 45,000/- in the name of Neha Puri and V.K. Puri. It was created on 26.04.1999 with maturity period of three years and thus was due on 26.04.2002. PW134 had handed over these original FDRs alongwith other documents to CBI. No suggestion has been given to this witness in his cross-examination that the accused had not applied for these FDRs and had not invested any amount for creation of these FDRs. Evidently, all the three FDRs were alive at the end of the check period and therefore, their total principal amount Rs. 1,84,286/- shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused as on that date.
Serial No. 81 to 84Serial No. 81 refers to a saving account in IDBI Bank, Pune but having zero credit balance.
So far as Serial No. 82, 83 & 84 are concerned, these are three FDRs, the originals of which have been proved by the bank witness PW136 as Ex. PW136/B (Colly.). He had also proved the original account opening forms related to these FDRs Ex. PW-136/D (Colly). The photographs of the accused on these forms admitted by them. FDR No. 0117057241000 is in the name of V.K. Puri for principal amount of Rs. 48,000/-, FDR No. 011705741100 is in the name of Neha Puri for Rs. 42,000/- and FDR No. 0115657312700 is in the name of Amita Puri for principal amount of Rs. 48,000/-. All the three FDRs CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 144 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. were alive at the end of the check period as they were payable in 2003. Therefore, the total principal amount reflected in these three FDRs as Rs. 1,38,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 85 to 87These two are TDRs issued by UTI Bank, Mumbai. PW27 has appeared from the bank and has proved the original TDRs as Ex. PW-27/F, Ex. PW-27/G & Ex. PW-27/H. The TDR Ex. PW-27/F bearing No. 705621 is in the name of V.K. Puri for the sum of Rs. 50,000/- and was created on 17.08.1999 with maturity date as 18.08.2002. The TDR Ex.PW-27/G bearing No. 704263 is in the joint name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in the principal sum of Rs. 42,000/- created on 08.09.2001 with date of maturity as 08.09.2003. The third TDR Ex. PW-27/H bearing No. 704270 is also in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- and was created on 08.09.2001 with maturity date of 08.09.2003. As per the document Ex. PW-27/E- 1, all the three TDRs were prematurely encashed on 14.03.2002. Thus, there is sufficient material on record to hold that the accused had invested in these three TDRs and that these were alive as on 22.02.2002. Therefore, the total principal amount of Rs. 1,34,000/- as reflected in these three TDRs shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 88 to 90These refer to three TDRs in the name of the accused in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 145 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. UTI Bank, Pune. The original TDRs are not on record. PW43 who had appeared from the bank has only proved the account opening forms. He also proved computerized statement of accounts related to these TDRs but the same is not accompanied by any Certificate U/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act or under Bankers' Books Evidence Act. PW43 has also deposed in his cross-examination that the account opening forms have not been verified by any bank official and do not bear the signatures of the bank officials at any other place except for attesting the photographs affixed upon them. Hence, the evidence on record does not lead to any sound conclusion that the accused had invested any amount in these TDRs during the check period.
Serial No. 91 & 92These have been already discussed alongwith Serial Nos. 51 & 52.
Serial No. 93 to 94These are two FDRs in ICICI Bank, Pune in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 48,000/- each. The bank witness PW41 has proved the original FDRs as Ex. PW- 41/F and Ex. PW-41/L. He has also proved the original account opening forms as Ex. PW-41/E and Ex. PW-41/K. Perusal of these forms and FDRs shows that these were created on 19.04.1999 with a maturity period of three years. There is an endorsement on the reverse of the FDRs to the effect that these were encashed prematurely on 04.03.2002. It is thus proved CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 146 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. that these two FDRs were created in the name of the accused Amita Puri and V.K. Puri on their request and were alive at the end of the check period i.e. 22.02.2002. Therefore, the total principal amount of these two FDRs i.e. 96,000/- was an asset at the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 95 to 96These are also two FDRs in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in ICICI Bank, Pune in the sum of Rs. 48,000/- each. No submissions were made on these by the Ld. Counsel for the accused. Even otherwise also, the original account opening forms have been proved by PW41 as Ex. PW-41/N and Ex. PW- 41/S. He has also proved the original FDRs as Ex. PW-41/P and Ex. PW-41/T. Perusal of the FDRs shows that these were created on 20.04.1999 with a maturity period of three years. Thus, the total principal amount of Rs. 96,000/- reflected in these FDRs shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 97 to 102These are six FDRs in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- stated to have been obtained by the accused in Global Tust Bank, Pune. However, the prosecution has not examined any witness from the bank to prove the FDRs or any other document related to these FDRs. Thus, no such investments reflected in these FDRs can be attributed to the accused.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 147 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 103 to 108 These are also six TDRs in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- each in the name of the accused and their daughters issued by Indus Ind Bank Limited. These TDRs have been admitted by the accused and thus the total principal amount of Rs. 2,52,000/- as reflected in these TDRs shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 109 to 111These are three saving bank accounts bearing No. 980677, 980679 & 980680 in Cosmos Cooperative Bank Ltd. Pune. The bank witness PW45 has only proved the account opening forms related to these accounts as Ex. PW-45/P1 to Ex. PW-45/P3. The statements related to these accounts are not on record and have not been proved by this witness. Therefore, there is no evidence on record to show that there was any credit balance in these accounts as on date at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 112 to 113These are two FDRs in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each in Global Trust Bank Ltd., Mumbai. PW129 has appeared from the bank. He deposed that a letter Ex. PW-129/A was received from CBI seeking information and documents relating to the accounts of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in their branch and the same was marked to him by the Incharge (Operations) Sh. Dass Gupta. He further deposed that he pulled out the account opening forms, CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 148 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. transcripts and the requisitioned FDRs as well as other related documents from the bank records which were then forwarded by Sh. Dass gupta vide letter dated 23.03.2002. He further proved all those documents including the original TDR Nos. 1900, 515953, 1900515946, account opening forms etc alongwith the said letter dt. 23.03.2002 as Ex. PW-129/B (Colly.). He identified the signatures of Sh. Dass Gupta at Point A on the said letter. As per the said letter, two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each were issued by the bank in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri on 09.04.1997 which matured on 09.04.2000 and were reinvested in the form of new FDR in the sum of Rs. 75,582/- each to mature on 10.01.2003. It is further stated that these renewed FDRs were got prematurely encashed on 05.03.2002. The original renewed FDRs, dated 24.04.2000, both in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 75,582/- each with maturity date as 10.01.2003 are on record as a part of Ex. PW-129/B (Colly.). It has nowhere been put to this witness PW129 in his cross-examination that the accused had not invested in these FDRs and that they had not encashed these FDRs. It is thus proved that the accused were holding two FDRs as on date at the end of the check period with initial principal amount of Rs. 50,000/- each and the same were got encashed after the end of the check period. Therefore, the principal value of these two FDRs i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 149 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 114 to 115 These are two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 55,000/- each in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in ICICI Bank, New Delhi. The accused had admitted these two FDRs and hence, their principal amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- shall be accounted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 116 to 117These are also two FDRs in the joint name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the sum of Rs. 55,000/- each in HSBC, Mumbai. However, no witness from the bank has been examined to prove these FDRs and therefore, have to be discarded.
Serial No. 118 to 119 and 121 to 126These are eight FDRs in the name of the accused V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in Standard Chartered Grindleys Bank Ltd, Mumbai. The original FDRs are not on record. The Bank witness PW75 has only proved the computer generated deposit confirmation slips which are marked as Ex.PW-75/T-11, Ex.PW- 75/T-13, Ex.PW-75/T-15, Ex.PW-75/T-17, Ex.PW-75/T-19, Ex. PW-75/T-21, Ex.PW-75/T-24 & Ex.PW-75/T-26. These are not accompanied by any certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. PW75 could not identify the signatures on these slips. He had not taken these print outs. Hence, there is no legally admissible evidence on record to show that accused had invested in any such FDRs.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 150 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 120 This refers to a fixed deposit No. 2559 in the name of V.K. Puri in Punjab National Bank, Dehradun. However, no bank witness has been examined to prove the same and therefore, it cannot be considered.
Serial No. 127 to 129These related to one saving bank account No. 24529979 in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri as well as two fixed deposits in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each in their joint names in Standard Chartered Grindleys Bank, New Delhi. However, no bank witness has been examined to prove these FDRs as well as the balance in the saving account. Hence, these have to be kept out of consideration.
Serial No. 130 to 131These are two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 55,000/- each in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in the HDFC Bank, Mumbai. The original FDRs are not on record. Witness from the bank PW107 has referred only two account opening forms but could not identify the signatures of any bank official on those forms. There is no evidence on record to show that the accused had invested in any such FDRs.
Serial No. 132 to 133These are again two TDRs in sum of Rs. 45,000/- each in the name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri respectively. The original TDRs are not on record. The bank witness PW67 has referred CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 151 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. to the two acknowledgment slips Mark 67/B and Mark 67/C. He has not proved any other document to show that infact the two TDRs had been issued in the name of the accused or that those were alive at the end of the check period. Hence, there is no cogent evidence on record to hold that the accused had invested in these TDRs.
Serial No. 134, 135 & 137These are three FDRs in the name of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri and Neha Puri respectively in HDFC Bank, Pune. The original FDRs are not on record. The bank witness PW51 has proved only the original deposit confirmation advices Ex. PW-15/J, Ex. PW-15K and Ex. PW-15/L. There is no evidence on record to show that any such FDR were infact issued in the name of accused and their daughter Neha Puri. Hence, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 136It refers to saving account in the name of Amita Puri in HDFC Bank, Pune. However, the same is stated to be having zero credit balance on the date at the end of the check period and hence, has to be ignored.
Serial No. 138 to 140Serial No. 138 and 139 are two VCCs in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri respectively. The bank witness PW22 has proved the original account opening forms as Ex. PW-22/G1 and Ex. PW-22/G2.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 152 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. The original VCCs have been proved by another bank witness PW35 as Ex. PW-35/F1 and Ex. PW-35/F2. PW35 has further deposed that these two VCCs were renewed in the year 2000 vide Ex. PW-35/F3 & Ex. PW-35/F4 but were encashed prematurely on 22.03.2002. It is thus proved that the accused had invested a sum of Rs. 50,000/- each in these two VCCs and these were alive as on 22.02.2002. Therefore, their total principal amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- shall be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
So far as the saving bank account no. 16449 in the joint name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri is concerned, its statement proved by PW22 as Ex. PW-22/D consist of one photocopy page and two computer print outs. These are not accompanied by either Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act or under Bankers' Books Evidence Act. Hence, there is no legally admissible document to show credit balance in the same as on the date of end of the check period and therefore, has to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 141 to 157These refer to various saving accounts, TDRs and VCCs in the name of the accused in several banks. However, no witness from any of those banks have been examined to prove these investments stated to have been made by the accused. Hence, these cannot be taken into account at all.
Serial No. 158 to 161These are three TDRs and one saving bank account in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 153 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, Mumbai Branch, Mumbai. The original TDRs are on record. PW108, the bank witness has deposed that these TDRs alongwith other documents had been handed over by the bank to CBI. These bear the seal of the bank on the front as well as on the rear side. It is not understandable as to why these were not exhibited during the deposition of PW108 and have been only marked as Mark PW- 108/C, Mark PW-108/D & Mark PW-108/E. These have come from genuine source i.e. the bank. It has nowhere been suggested to PW108 in his cross-examination that these three TDRs have not been issued at the request of the accused. In the opinion of this court, it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that these three TDRs were issued as renewal of earlier three TDRs in the name of the accused. The TDR No. 01292023066 in the name of Amita Puri and TDR No. 10292023065 in the name of V.K. Puri are in the amount of Rs. 43,000/- each issued on 23.12.2001 with maturity period of three years. The TDR No. 01292036600 is in the joint name of Neha Puri and V.K. Puri in the sum of Rs. 44,000/- issued on 07.02.2002 with maturity period of 39 months. There is an endorsement on the reverse of all the three TDRs that these were got encashed prematurely by the accused on 06.03.2002. It is thus manifest that these were alive as on date at the end of the check period i.e. 22.02.2002 and thus, the total principal amount of these three TDRs I.e Rs. 1,70,000/- was an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
So far as the saving account No. 7461 in the joint name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in the same bank is concerned, its CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 154 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. statement which has been proved on record is only a computer generated statement and not accompanied by any certificate either under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act or under Bankers' Books Evidence Act. PW108 has deposed in his cross-examination that he has not generated the said document. Therefore, there is no evidence on record to show that there was any credit balance in the said account at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 162 & 167 to 170These are various saving accounts and Demat Accounts in the name of the accused in various banks but were found having zero credit balance as on date of end of the check period and thus have to be ignored.
Serial No. 163 to 166These are four VCCs in the name of the accused in Syndicate Bank, Mumbai. However, no witness from the bank has been examined to prove the same and therefore, these have to be taken out of the consideration.
161. Thus there were movable assets in the nature of Fixed Deposit Receipts in various banks and credit balance in Saving Bank Accounts in the total amount of Rs. 46,17,351.19 P. in the name of the two accused and their two daughters at the end of the check period i.e. 22.02.2002.
162. The purported investments of the accused in various private CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 155 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. companies shall be now discussed hereunder serial wise from the table mentioned in paragraphs No. 8 hereinabove in order to ascertain as to how many of those have been duly proved to have been made by the accused and have to be counted as an asset in their hands at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 1 to 4These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 16,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri issued by M/s Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. However, nobody from the said company has been examined to prove these FDRs. Therefore, these cannot be taken into account.
Serial No. 5 to 8These also are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri issued by M/s Larsen & Turbo Ltd. These are admitted by the accused and therefore, the total principal amount of these four FDRs i.e. Rs. 80,000/- shall be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 9 to 12These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri issued by M/s Camlin Ltd. PW113 has appeared from the said company but he has not deposed anything about these FDRs. He stated that he has seen these FDRs for the first time in the court and have never dealt with those at any point of time.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 156 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Therefore, there is no cogent evidence on record to show that the accused had invested in these FDRs. The same have to be discarded.
Serial No. 13 to 16These are again four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri issued by Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd. PW138 had appeared from the said company. However, he has only proved the original applications for issuance of these FDRs. These applications do not bear the seal or signature of any company official. Original FDRs are not on record. Hence, there is no cogent evidence to show that the accused had applied for issuance of these FDRs and these FDRs were actually issued in their names. Same have to be discarded.
Serial No. 17 to 20These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri issued by M/s RPG Cables Ltd. The witness from the company PW117 has not proved any document related to these FDRs. Even though, the original applications for issue of FDRs are on record but these do not bear the seal or signature of any company official. The FDRs are not on record. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused had applied for issue of these FDRs and these FDRs had actually been issued in their names. These too have to be discarded.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 157 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 21 to 24 These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by M/s Escorts Ltd in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. These are not disputed on behalf of the accused. Therefore, the total principal amount of these four FDRs i.e. Rs. 44,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 25 to 28These are four TDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by M/s SRF Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. However, no official from the company has been examined to prove these TDRs. Hence, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 29 to 32These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by Sri Adhikari Brothers T.V. Network Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW89 has not proved the FDRs or any document related thereto. He has admitted in his cross- examination that he did not bring on record any document pertaining to these FDRs. Hence, these have remained to be proved by the prosecution and are hereby discarded.
Serial No. 33 to 36These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- issued by M/s Schenectady Herdillia Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 158 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. These are not disputed on behalf of the accused and therefore, total principal amount of these four FDRs i.e. Rs. 44,000/- has to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 37 to 40These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each by M/s Berger Paints India Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW104 has not proved any document related to the FDRs. He had only referred to the Application Form Mark PW-104/C to Mark PW-104/F. These applications, however, do not bear seal or signature of any company official. The original FDRs are not on record. Thus, the evidence of this witness does not prove that any such FDR was issued in the names of the accused and their daughters by the said company. Ld. PP has referred to order dated 17.09.2012 which shows that a letter dt. 03.08.2012 has been received in the court from M/s Berger Paints India Ltd. alongwith cheques drawn on ICICI Bank for Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The court had directed these cheques to be released to the accused with the condition that they shall furnish the FDRs of equivalent amount to the court on which the court would have lien till the disposal of this case. The perusal of the order further shows that the accused had submitted that interest amount has not been paid to them by M/s Berger Paints India Limited on these fixed deposits and accordingly, a direction to that effect was passed by the court. It is, thus, evident that the accused CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 159 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. have admitted that they had invested in these four FDRs with M/s Berger Paints India Ltd and had also received the cheques deposited in the court by the said company towards the principal value of these FDRs. Therefore, the total principal value of these four FDRs I.e Rs. 48,000/- shall be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 41 to 44These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 12,000/- issued by M/s Steelage Industries Ltd. in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The company witness PW93 has proved the original FDRs as Ex. PW-93/D (Colly.). It was argued by Ld. Counsel for the accused that this witness was not the competent person to prove the FDR as he had not dealt with these deposits. However, no suggestion was given to him in the cross examination that the accused had not placed request for issue of these FDRs and that no such FDR was issued in the names of accused and their two daughters. Hence, it has been proved that the accused had invested in these four FDRs in their own names as well as in the names of their two daughters. The maturity date of these FDRs was 10.04.2002, meaning thereby, that these were alive as on 22.02.2002. Thus, the total principal amount of these four FDRs i.e. Rs. 48,000/- shall be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 45 to 48These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 160 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. issued by M/s Camphor & Allied Products Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. PW74 had appeared from the said company as a witness. He has referred to the application forms Mark PW74/B-1 to Mark 74/B-4. He has proved the extract of the deposit register as on 31.03.2002as Ex. PW-74/E but the same being a computerized document, is not supported by any Certificate of under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. Admittedly, this extract was not prepared by this witness PW74. Original FDRs are not on record. Therefore, there is no cogent evidence to hold that accused had invested in these FDRs.
Serial No. 49 to 52These are again four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by Dr. Morepen Laboratories Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW56 has proved one computerized sheet Ex. PW-56/A which is not supported by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The original FDRs are not on record. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove any such investment of the accused.
Serial No. 53 to 56These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 12,000/- each issued by M/s Ceat Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The original FDRs are not on record. The witness from company PW96 has referred to application forms Mark PW96/B to Mark PW96/E. These do not bear seal or CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 161 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. signature of any company official. PW96 has deposed that these applications were not routed through him and he had not dealt with these. Thus, there is no evidence on record to hold that the accused were holding any such asset at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 57 to 60These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- issued by M/s Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemical Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW88 has proved the original FDRs as Ex. PW-88/G (Colly.). It may be noted here that these FDRs have been wrongly marked as Ex. PW-88/J (Colly.) in place of Ex. PW-88/G (Colly.). It was not put to him in his cross-examination that the accused or their daughters had not applied for issue of these FDRs and no such FDRs was actually issued in their names. Therefore, it is proved that the two accused and their two daughters were holding these FDRs. Thus, the total principal amount of these FDRs i.e. Rs. 48,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 61 to 64These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 12,000/- each issued by M/s Bajaj Tempo Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. PW38 has proved the original application as Ex. PW-38/B to Ex. PW-38/E. He has further deposed that receipt number is mentioned at Point A on these CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 162 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. applications and the details of the cheques issued for the FDRs are mentioned at Point X on these applications. He also proved his letter Ex. PW-38/F, whereby he had furnished the details of the FDRs to the CBI. It is evident from the said letter that the date of maturity of the FDRs was 21.08.2002 meaning thereby that these were alive on the date of the end of the check period 22.02.2002. There is nothing in his cross-examination to disbelieve him. It is, thus, proved that accused had invested in these four FDRs and the total principal amount of those i.e. Rs.48,000/- was an asset in their hands at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 65 to 68These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by M/s SESA Goa Ltd in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. PW99 had appeared from the company and has proved the letter Ex. PW-99/A giving details of all the FDRs and their renewals. As per the said letter, the FDR in the names of the accused and their two daughters were last renewed in the year 1999 with date of maturity as 09.09.2002. Original Renewal Applications of the year 1996 and 1999 are on record and have been marked during the testimony of this witness. There is no cross-examination of this witness to disbelieve him. It has not been put to him that the accused had not invested in these FDRs and no such FDRs were issued or renewed on their instance. Therefore, the evidence on record proved that the accused and their two daughters had invested Rs. 11,000/- each in these FDRs and the same had been CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 163 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. renewed from time to time at their instance and that these were alive at the end of the check period. Thus, the total principal amount of the FDRs i.e Rs. 44,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in their hands at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 69 to 72These are four FDRs in sum of Rs. 11,000/- each issued by M/s Dabur India Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW12 has proved the original FDRs of the year 1996 as Ex. PW12/B-1 to Ex. PW12/B-4. He has also proved the statement Ex. PW-12/C showing renewal of these FDRs in the year 1999 and their repayment on 28.02.2002. He has not been cross- examined on such renewals and repayments. It is, therefore, proved that these four FDRs in the names of the accused and their two daughters were alive on 22.02.2002 and had been encashed by them on 28.02.2002. Thus, the total principal amount of the FDRs i.e. Rs. 44,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset in their hands at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 73 to 76These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each issued by M/s Mukund Engineers Limited in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW90 has only proved the original application forms as Ex. PW-90/E-1 to Ex. PW-90/E-4. These do not bear the seal or signature of any company official. The original FDRs are not on record. Therefore, there is no evidence to show that CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 164 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. these FDRs were actually issued in the names of accused and their two daughters and which were available as assets in their hands at the end of the check period. So these are taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 77 to 80These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Mukund Engineers Ltd. The witness from the company PW151 has proved only the applications for issue of FDRs Ex. PW-151/B (Colly.). He has not proved any other record to show that the FDRs had actually been issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters vide these application forms. It cannot be said on the basis of his testimony that any such FDRs had been issued in the names of the accused and their daughters.
Serial No. 81 to 84These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Kalyani Steels Ltd. The witness from the company PW141 has proved only the application forms for issue of FDRs Ex. PW- 141/B (Colly.). These do not bear any sign or seal of any company official. There is no other document to show that any such FDRs had been issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters and if so, when and for how much maturity period. Hence, there is no evidence on record to show that any such FDR was alive at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 165 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 85 to 88 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Bharat Forge Ltd. The witness from the company PW52 has proved the original application forms for issue of FDRs in the year 1996 as Ex. PW-52/A3, Ex. PW-52/B3, Ex. PW-52/C3 & Ex. PW-52/D3. He has also proved the original FDRs issued in the year 1996 as Ex. PW-52/A-2, Ex. PW-52/B-2, Ex. PW- 52/C-2 & Ex. PW-52/D-2. He has also proved carbon copies of the renewed FDRs of the year 1999 in the names of these four person as Ex. PW-52/A4, Ex. PW-52/B4, Ex. PW-52/C4 & Ex. PW-52/D4. Perusal of these renewed FDRs showed that these were renewed on 30.10.1999 and their date of maturity was 29.10.2002. Hence, these were alive and available as an asset in the hands of the accused as on the date at the end of the check period. Their total principal amount of Rs. 44,000/- shall have to be added to the assets of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 89 to 92These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Usha Beltron Ltd. The witness from the company PW112 has proved four application forms for issue of FDRs as Ex. PW- 112/A (Colly.). Original FDRS are not on record. These application forms do not bear any sign or seal of any company official. PW112 has admitted in his cross-examination that he was not involved in compilation of these applications Ex. PW-
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 166 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. 112/A (Colly.), when these were sent to CBI. As deposed by him, these FDRs were not claimed by the accused on maturity. Therefore, there is no evidence on record to show that any such FDR was actually issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters.
Serial No. 93 to 96These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in M/s Datamatics Ltd. in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri. The witness from the company PW94 has proved only the application forms for issue of FDRs as Ex. PW- 94/A (Colly.). These application forms do not bear any sign or seal of any company official. Neither original FDRs nor their carbon copies have been proved on record. Therefore, there is no evidence on record to show that any such FDR had been issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters.
Serial No. 97 to 100These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd. Since these are admitted by the accused, their total principal value of Rs. 44,000/- shall be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 101 to 104These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 167 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. M/s Jubilant Organosys Ltd. Since these are admitted by the accused, their total principal value of Rs. 44,000/- shall be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 105 to 108These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 9,900/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Modern Threads India Ltd. The witness from the company PW115 has proved two letters Ex. PW-115/A and Ex. PW-115/C alongwith a computerized sheet bearing the details of certain FDRs in the names of accused and their two daughters. This computerized sheet is not supported by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Further, this sheet shows the date of maturity of the FDRs as 03.09.1999. There is no evidence on record to show that these FDRs had been renewed in the year 1999. Hence, these FDRs cannot be treated as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 109 to 112These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 9,900/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Modern Syntex India Ltd. The witness from the company PW115 has deposed with regard to these FDRs also in the same manner as he has deposed with regard to the FDRs mentioned at Serial No. 105 to 108. His testimony as well as the documents referred to him do not prove that any such FDR CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 168 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. was actually issued to the accused and their daughters and were available in their hands as an asset at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 113 to 116These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri of M/s Belarpur Industries Ltd. The witness from the company PW6 has proved only the application forms as Ex. PW-6/A1 to Ex. PW-6/A4. These do not bear seal or signature of any company official. Neither original FDRs nor their carbon copies have been proved. Therefore, there is no evidence on record to show that any such FDR was available as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 117 to 120These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Tata Tea Ltd. The witness from the company PW122 has proved only the computerized sheet Mark 122/B giving the details of some FDRs. This computerized sheet is not supported by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Neither original FDRs nor their carbon copies are on record. Therefore, there is no evidence to show that any such FDR had been actually issued in the names of the two accused and their daughters.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 169 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 121 to 124 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 13,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Zuari Industries Ltd. The witness from the company PW103 has proved only the original application forms as a part of the Ex. PW-103/A (Colly.). These forms do not bear the seal or signature of any company official. Neither original FDR nor their carbon copies have been proved, therefore, it cannot be said that any such FDR had actually been issued in the names of two accused and their two daughters.
Serial No. 125 to 128These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 16,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s TISCO. The witness from the company PW116 has not proved any document except the two letters Ex. PW-116/B and Ex. PW-116/C to show that any such FDRs were issued to the accused. Further, it is not clear from these two letters that any such FDR was alive in the year 2002. Hence, the value of these FDRs cannot be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 129 to 132These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s VIP Industries Ltd. The witness from the company PW64 has proved a letter Ex. PW-64/B (Colly.) addressed to CBI with which a computerized statement has been annexed. This CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 170 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. computerized statement is not accompanied by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Neither original FDRs nor their carbon copies have been proved on record. Therefore, it cannot be said that any such FDR was held by the accused and was available as an asset with them at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 133 to 136These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Roofit Ind. Ltd. The prosecution has not examined any witness from the company to prove these FDRs. Therefore, these have to be discarded.
Serial No. 137 to 140These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Excel Industries Ltd. The witness from company PW78 has proved only the computerized print out Ex. PW-78/E giving details of certain FDRs. This print out is not accompanied by any Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. He has deposed in his cross-examination that he does not know who has taken this print out and from which computer. There is no other document on record related to these FDRs. Hence, the evidence on record does not show with certainty that any such FDR had been issued to the accused and their two daughters and were available in their hands at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 171 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 141 to 144 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Cable Corporation of India Ltd. The witness from company PW81 has proved four original FDRs which are Mark PW81/B to Mark PW81/E. The original applications for issue of FDRs are Mark PW81/F to Mark PW81/I. Ld. PP was unable to explain as to why these original FDRs and original application forms were not exhibited during the testimony of PW81. Ld. Defence Counsel submitted that since PW81 was unable to identify the signatures on the FDRs, these were held to be not proved and accordingly, were not exhibited. In my opinion, since these original FDRs and original application forms had come from a genuine source I.e the company which issued them, these stood sufficiently proved by PW81 and should have been exhibited. It has not been put in the cross-examination of this witness that the accused and their two daughters have not applied for these FDRs or that their signatures have been forged by somebody on the said application forms or that these original FDRs do not belong to them. Hence, it is proved from the testimony of PW81 and the original documents proved by him that these four FDRs were issued in the names of two accused and their two daughters and thus their principal amount of Rs. 44,000/- shall have to be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 145 to 148These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 172 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. M/s Apcotex Lattices Ltd. The witness from company PW97 has proved only the original application forms Ex. PW97/B to Ex. PW97/E. These forms do not bear the signature or seal of any company official. No other document related to the FDRs has been proved on record. Therefore, it is very difficult to say that any such FDR had been issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters.
Serial No. 149 to 152These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri of M/s Mcdowell & Company Ltd. The prosecution has not examined any witness from the company to prove that any such FDR had actually been issued to the accused and their two daughters. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 153 to 156These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Titan Industries Ltd. The witness from the company PW63 has proved only the original application forms Ex. PW-63/C to Ex. PW-63/F. These forms do not bear signature or seal of any company official and do not show that any such FDR was actually issued. There is no other document available on record related to these FDRs. Hence, the evidence on record does not show that the accused were holding any such FDR at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 173 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 157 to 160 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 13,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Godfrey Phillips Ltd. However, no document related to these FDRs is on record. Even no witness from the company has been examined to prove that any such FDR had been issued to the accused and their two daughters. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 161 to 164These are four Mutual Fund Folio in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Alliance New Millenium Ltd. However, no witness from the said company has been examined to prove that any such in investment was made by the accused and their two daughters in the said company.
Serial No. 165 to 168These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri of M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd. The company witness PW31 has proved the letter dated 01.05.2006 as Ex. PW31/C which was received by the company from the accused with which they had sent original FDRs Ex. PW-31/D to Ex. PW-31/G for encashment on their maturity. He has deposed that these FDRs were duly encashed and payment was made through cheques. These FDRs had matured and the payment was made on 10.10.2002. This witness has not been cross-examined by the accused at all.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 174 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Hence, it is evident from his testimony that these four FDRs were alive at the end of the check period and thus their total principal value of Rs. 44,000/- has to be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 169 to 172These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Saurashtra Cement Ltd. The company witness PW61 has referred to four original application forms Mark PW-61/B (Colly.). These forms do not bear signature or seal of any company official. He has also proved four original FDRs but they had matured in the year 1999. There is nothing in his testimony to show that these had been renewed further in the year 1999. Hence, these FDRs cannot be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period in the year 2002.
Serial No. 173 to 176These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Ashima Ltd. Ahemdabad. The company witness PW87 has proved four letters issued by the company officials to CBI as Ex. PW-87/B, Ex. PW-87/C, Ex. PW-87/D and Ex. PW-87/E. She has identified the signature of the respective company officials on each of these letters. It has been stated in the letter Ex. PW- 87/E that four FDRs bearing No. C375057, C375055, C375056 & C375058 had been issued by the company in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amit Puri, minor Divya CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 175 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Puri and Neha Puri respectively on the basis of the cheques issued on HDFC Bank, Naurangpura, Ahemdabad. It is further stated that the maturity date of each of these FDRs was 08.04.2002. It is further stated that the company had received the request for repayment of these fixed deposits from the respective fixed deposit holders alongwith original duly discharged fixed deposit receipts on 21.03.2002 vide their joint letter dt. 16.03.2002 and on receipt of the same, the company made repayment of these FDRs on 23.03.2002 and the repayment cheques had been dispatched to the address B-77, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60. There is no cross- examination of PW87 on the contents of the said letter. No suggestion has been given to the witness to the effect that the accused or their daughters had not got issued these FDRs in their names or that they had not received cheques as repayment of these FDRs in March, 2002. It is, therefore, manifest that these four FDRs had been issued in the names of the accused and their minor daughters and were available as an asset in their hands at the end of the check period in the year 2002. Therefore, their total principal value of Rs. 44,000/- has to be added to the assets of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 177 to 180These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Dharamsi Morarji. The company witness PW114 has proved only the original application forms as Ex. PW-114/D to CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 176 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ex. PW-114/G. These forms do not bear the seal or signature of any company official. No other document related to these FDRs has been proved. Therefore, there is no evidence to show that any such FDRs had been actually issued to the accused and their two daughters.
Serial No. 181 to 184These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Crompton Greaves Ltd. The prosecution has not examined any witness from the said company to prove that any such FDR had actually been issued to the accused and their two daughters. Hence, these have to be discarded.
Serial No. 185 to 188These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s BPL Ltd. Bangalore. The witness from the company PW111 has proved only the original applications for issue of FDRs of the year 1996 and original FDRs issued in the year 1996 Ex. PW- 111/B (Colly.). There is no evidence on record to show that these FDRs had been further renewed in the year 1999. Therefore, it cannot be said that these FDRs were available as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the year 2002.
Serial No. 189 to 190These are two FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 177 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the names of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri in M/s Godrej Industries Ltd. The company witness PW98 has referred to two original applications Mark PW-98/B and Mark PW-98/C of the year 1996. He has also proved two original FDRs of the year 1996 as Ex. PW-98/D and Ex. PW-98/E as well as two original application forms of the year 1999 as Mark PW-98/F and Mark PW-98/G. He has also proved a computerized table Ex. PW-98/H giving the details of certain FDRs. This statement is not supported by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. There is no evidence on record to show that these FDRs had been renewed in the year 1999 and were alive in the year 2002. Therefore, these cannot be taken to be an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 191 to 194These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s SPIC Industries Ltd. The prosecution has not examined any witness from the said company to prove these FDRs. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 195 to 198These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 16,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Raymond Ltd. Since these are admitted by the accused, therefore, their total principal value of Rs. 64,000/- shall be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 178 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 199 to 202 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 14,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s IL&FS Ltd. The prosecution has not examined any witness from the said company to prove these FDRs. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 203 to 206These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s ACC Ltd. The witness from the company PW142 has proved four original FDRs as Ex. PW-142/A (Colly.). Perusal of these FDRs shows that these had matured on 09.04.2000. There is no witness to show that these have been further renewed at the request of the FDR Holders. Therefore, these cannot be taken to be available as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period in the year 2002.
Serial No. 207 to 210These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 16,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. The witness from the company PW70 has proved four original FDRs issued in the year 1997 as Ex. PW-70/C, Ex. PW-70/E, Ex. PW-70/G & Ex. PW-70/J. He has also proved the original applications for renewal of these FDRs in the year 2000 as Ex. PW-70/B, Ex. PW-70/D, Ex. PW-70/F & Ex. PW-70/H. However, these forms do not bear the signature or seal of any company official. There CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 179 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. is no evidence on record to show that these FDRs had been actually renewed in the year 2000 and were alive in the year 2002. Hence, these shall have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 211 to 214These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 42,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s HDFC Ltd. Since these are admitted by the accused, therefore, their total principal value of Rs. 1,68,000/- shall be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 215 to 218These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Whirlpool Home Appliances Ltd. The witness from the company PW95 has proved the certified copies of four FDRs in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri as Ex. PW-95/B (Colly.). These FDRs have been issued in the year 1993. The witness has admitted in the cross-examination that these were not renewed in the year 1996. Therefore, in view of the testimony of PW95, these FDRs were not alive in the year 2002 and hence, cannot taken to be an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 219These are shares in the value of Rs. 5000/- in the joint name of Amita Puri and V.K. Puri in M/s Amit Spinning Industries CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 180 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ltd. The witness from the company PW132 has only proved a computerized statement of the company Ex. PW-132/C. It is not supported by any Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Neither the original Share Certificate nor their copies have been produced. There is no other document on record relating to these shares. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused were holding these shares even in the year 2002 at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 220 to 223These are four bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Krishna Bhagya Nigam Ltd, Bangalore. The witness from the company PW82 has proved two letters Ex. PW-82/A and Ex. PW-82/C written by two other company officials to CBI, giving details of some bonds held by the accused and their two daughters. The witness has admitted that these letters had been written much before he had joined the company. He was unable to say as to on the basis of which record were these letters written. No original record has been produced with regards to these bonds. Therefore, the evidence on record does not prove that the accused and their two daughters had, infact, subscribed to these bonds or that these bonds were available in their hands in the year 2002 at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 224 to 227These are 64 bonds in the sum of Rs. 16,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 181 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Ltd. The witness from the company PW131 has proved the original applications for issue of bonds in a public issue of the company and a computerized statement as a part of Ex. PW-131/B (Colly.). The computerized statement is not accompanied by any Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. It is not clear from the testimony of this witness, whether any such bonds were actually issued to the accused and their two daughters or not. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove that any such asset in the form of these bonds was available with the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 228 to 231These are 110 shares of M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. in the names of V.K. Puri (55 shares having value of Rs. 10,008/-) & Amita Puri (55 shares having value of Rs. 10,008/-). PW76 has been examined with regard to these shares. He is from Karvy Consultants Limited, The Registrars and Transfer Agents of Reliance India Ltd. He has only proved certain computerized print outs as Ex. PW-76/B, Ex. PW-76/C, Ex. PW-76/D & Ex. PW-76/E and certified photocopies as Ex. PW-76/F (Colly.). The computerized print outs are not accompanied by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. He has not proved any original document related to these shares. Therefore, there is no legally admissible evidence on record to show that any such shares had actually been alloted to the accused and in the names of their two daughters.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 182 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 232 to 233 These are shares of M/s Lumax Industries Ltd. Worth Rs. 1000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri. PW79 has proved two original Share Applications Mark PW-79/B and Mark PW-79/C as well as one computerized print out Ex. PW- 79/D. This print out is not supported by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. There is no legally admissible evidence on record to show that any such shares had actually been issued to the two accused.
Serial No. 234 to 237These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Cummins India Ltd., Pune. The witness from the company PW86 has proved 12 original applications for issue of FDRs. These application forms do not bear any signature or seal of any company official. This witness has also proved certain computerized print outs Ex. PW-86/D, Ex. PW-86/E, Ex. PW- 86/F, Ex. PW-86/G and Ex. PW-86/H. However, these are not accompanied by any any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The witness has also proved some FDRs Ex. PW-86/J (Colly.). Perusal of these FDRs reveals that these had matured on 26.08.1996. There is not evidence on record to show that these were further renewed and were alive in the year 2002. Therefore, in view of the said evidence, it cannot be said that these FDRs were available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 183 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 238 to 241 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 34,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s SBI Home Finance Ltd., Kolkatta. However, the prosecution has not examined any witness from the said company to prove these FDRs. Therefore, these have to be taken out of consideration.
Serial No. 242These are 100 Shares in the in the name of V.K. Puri in M/s The Prag Bosimi Synthetics Ltd, Guwahati with the value of Rs. 1000/-. Since these are admitted by the accused, therefore, their principal value of Rs. 1,000/- has to be taken as an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 243These are 100 Shares in the in the name of Amita Puri in M/s Finolex Industries Ltd., Pune, having value of Rs. 4000/-. The witness from the company PW79 has proved some computerized print outs giving details of shares held by accused Amita Puri. These print outs are not accompanied by any Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence act. No original record has been proved by this witness. Therefore, these shares cannot be counted as an asset in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 184 of 197CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Serial No. 244 to 247 These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each in the name of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s ITC Bhadrachalam Ltd. Kolkatta. The witness from the company PW68 has proved two FDRs of the year 1993 in the sum of Rs. 11,000/- each with maturity date as 28.06.1996. He has also proved four FDRs of Rs. 11,000/- each issued in the year 1996 with maturity date as 29.06.1999. There is no evidence on record to show that these FDRs has been further renewed in the year 1999 and were alive in the year 2002. Hence, these cannot be taken to be an asset available in the hands of the accused at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 248 to 253These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 9,900/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s Modern Terry Towels Ltd., Jaipur and 400 shares of the same company (200 shares having value of Rs. 6000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and 200 Shares having value of Rs. 6,000/- in the name of Amita Puri). However, no witness from the said company has been examined to prove these FDRs and Share Certificates. Therefore, these have to be discarded.
Serial No. 254 to 255These are 200 shares of M/s Modern Syntex Ltd., Jaipur (100 shares worth Rs. 3,000/- in the name of V.K. Puri and 100 shares worth Rs. 3,000/- in the name of Amita Puri). The witness from company PW115 has proved only the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 185 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. computerized statement related to certain shares in the name of V.K. Puri and Amita Puri as Ex. PW-115/D (Colly.). It is not accompanied by any Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. No original record related to these shares has been proved. Therefore, it cannot be said on the basis of testimony of this witness that any such shares had been allotted to the two accused or were held by them in the year 2002.
Serial No. 256These are 100 shares having value of Rs. 3,500/- in the name of V.K. Puri in M/s United Breweries (Holdings) Ltd., Bangalore. The witness from the company PW105 has proverd only the computerized print out Ex. PW-105/B giving details of certain shares in the name of V.K. Puri. However, this is not accompanied by any Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. This statement also does not bear the signature of PW105 and was not prepared by him. No original record related to these shares has been proved. Hence, there is no legally admissible evidence on record to show that any such share had been issued in the name of V.K. Puri and were available with him in the year 2002 at the end of the check period.
Serial No. 257 to 260These are four FDRs in the sum of Rs. 12,000/- each in the names of V.K. Puri, Amita Puri, Neha Puri and Divya Puri in M/s ION Exchange (1) Ltd., Mumbai. The witness from the company PW83 has proved only the four application forms for issue of FDRs as Ex. PW-83/B, Ex. PW-83/C, Ex. PW-83/D and CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 186 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. Ex. PW-83/E. These forms do not bear signature or seal of any company official. Neither original FDRs nor their carbon copies have been produced. There is no other document on record related to these FDRs and hence, it cannot be said on the basis of testimony of this witness that any such FDR had been issued in the names of the accused and their two daughters.
163. It is, therefore, proved from the evidence lead by prosecution that the accused had immovable assets worth Rs. 9,45,000/- in their possession at the end of the check period in the form of the FDRs and Shares etc in various private companies as noted hereinabove.
164. Thus, the accused were holding movable assets in the total sum of Rs. 55,62,351.19 in the nature of credit balance in saving bank account, FDRs, Shares etc in various banks as well as private companies in their own names as well as in the names of their two minor daughters at the end of the check period.
165. The prosecution has thus proved that the accused possessed total assets (movable and immovable) worth Rs. 80,80,854.19 at the end of the check period.
Disproportionate Assets, If Any, In Possession Of Accused V.K. Puri At The End Of The Check Period.
166. The discussion hereinbefore leads to the following calculations :-
(1) Assets of the accused at the end of the check period.. Rs. 80,80,854.19. (2) Less Assets at the start of the check period (-) .... Rs. 1,80,373.20 CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 187 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. (3) Total Assets accumulated during the check period ... Rs. 79,00,480.99 (4) Expenditure during the check period (+) ... Rs. 15,44,439.00 (5) Assets and expenditure during the check period ... Rs. 94,44,919.99 (6) Income during the check period ... Rs. 52,15,441.28 (7) Disproportionate Assets ... Rs. 42,29,478.71
167. The evidence led by the prosecution and the documents proved by the prosecution witnesses clearly show that accused V.K. Puri had invested huge amounts of money by way of FDRs, Shares etc in banks as well as private companies in the name of his wife i.e. accused Amita Puri and the two minor daughters namely Neha Puri and Divya Puri. Admittedly, accused Amita Puri had worked as a Teacher in a private school for about 3 years only, wherefrom she had earned total salary of Rs. 48,617.80. Hence, the major portion of assets found in her name at the end of the check period was by way of the FDRs and shares etc in various banks and private companies, which also had been reflected by her in the income tax returns. These assets run into several lakhs of rupees, when calculated at the end of the check period. By no stretch of imagination, can she be taken to have made such investments and accumulated such huge assets from the aforesaid meagre salary which she earned from the post of teacher for three years in a private school. She had come forward to explain these assets in her name by producing the bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) showing purported sale of gold jewellery and silver utensils to M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore. However, all these bills have been found to be forged and fictitious. It has come out on the basis of the evidence led by the parties on this aspect that no such sale of gold jewellery and silver utensils was made by her. In view of the same and considering that the financial figures of accused V.K. Puri as well CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 188 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. as his wife i.e Amita Puri were so intricately connected with each other, their income and expenditure has been clubbed. It was done also for the reason that the evidence on record made it evident that the investments made in her name during the check period were from the tainted money gained by accused V.K. Puri. Considering all these aspects, it was found proper and convenient to take into account the assets held in the name of accused Amita Puri at the end of the check period while calculating the disproportionate assets of accused V.K. Puri.
168. It was also argued on behalf of the accused that the minor daughters Neha Puri and Divya Puri of the two accused had attained maturity on 04.01.1999 & 24.12.2000 respectively, whereafter the investments made in their names were gifted to them by their parents. It was sought to be argued that thereafter Neha Puri and Divya Puri became absolute owners of such investments and hence, the same cannot be considered while calculating the assets of the accused at the end of the check period. I do not find any merit in these submissions. It is admitted case of the accused that their daughters Neha Puri and Divya Puri were not having any source of income at all during the entire check period ending on 22.02.2002. Thus, it is manifest that the movable assets held by them at the end of the check period in the shape of FDRs and Shares in banks and private companies were generated from the income earned by their father i.e V.K. Puri during the check period. Merely because in a case of disproportionate assets, the accused claims to have gifted some assets to his children, does not mean that those assets have to be ignored while calculating the assets of that accused at the end of the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 189 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. check period. At the most, the minor children of the accused can claim immunity from prosecution as an abettor of the offence on the ground of the minority and being unaware about the financial investments made in their names, which has been done in the instant case also. The fact remains that the assets found in the name of the two daughters of the accused at the end of the check period were not obtained by them out of their own separate income but had been obtained in their names by their father i.e. V.K. Puri from his own tainted income earned during the check period. Hence, those assets had to be included in the assets of the accused V.K. Puri at the end of the check period.
169. It was also argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused that amassing of assets disproportionate to his income by the accused V.K. Puri during the check period would, at best, tantamount to only 'misconduct' for which he could have been subjected to departmental inquiry by his department and the same does not tantamount to 'criminal misconduct' as envisaged by Section 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, attracting criminal prosecution. It was sought to be argued that the accused has satisfactorily explained the source of income from which he has obtained those assets i.e. the sale of gold jewellery and silver utensils by his wife Amita Puri vide bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) and his only guilt was that he did not intimate his department about the money got in said sale. These arguments have been noted only to be rejected. It is not a simple case of misconduct but a clear case of criminal misconduct envisaged under section 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for the reason that bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) have been found to be forged/fictitious and the CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 190 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. accused has failed to explain any other genuine source of income from which he has obtained such huge assets running into several lakhs of rupees during the check period. Similar arguments had been raised in the Supreme Court in P. Nallamal and Anr. vs. State (1999) 6 SCC 559 on behalf of delinquent public servant but were rejected with following observations:-
" 19. Shri K.K. Venugopal endeavoured to establish that the offence under Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act is to be understood as an offshoot of the different facets of misconduct of a public servant enumerated in clauses (a) to (d) of the sub-section which a public which a public servant might commit. According to him, unless the ill-gotten wealth has a nexus with the sources contemplated in the preceding clauses the public servant cannot be held guilty under clause (e) of Section 13(1). Learned Senior Counsel elaborated his contention like this: If a public servant is able to account for the excess wealth by showing some clear sources, though not legally permissible, but not falling under any of the preceding clauses of the sub-section, he would be discharging the burden cast on him. He cited an example like this:
If the public servant satisfies the court that the excess wealth possessed by him is attributable to the dowry amount which he received from the father-in-law of his son, the public servant is not liable to be convicted under the aforesaid clause.
20. The above contention perhaps could have been advanced before the enactment of the PC Act, 1988 because Section 5(1)(e) of the old PC Act did not contain an "Explanation" as Section 13(1)
(e) now contains. As per the Explanation the "known sources of income" of the public servant, for the purpose of satisfying the court, should be "any lawful source". Besides being the lawful source the Explanation further enjoins that receipt of such income should have been intimated by the public servant in accordance CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 191 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. with the provisions of any law applicable to such public servant at the relevant time. So a public servant cannot now escape from the tentacles of Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act by showing other legally forbidden sources, albeit such sources are outside the purview of clauses (a) to (d) of the sub-section."
170. As noted hereinabove, the accused V.K. Puri is found to have amassed assets in the value of Rs. 42,29,478.71 disproportionate to his known sources of income during the check period for which he has failed to provide any satisfactory explanation. The only explanation put forward by him to the effect that he had got these assets from the money which his wife had obtained from the sale of gold jewellery and silver utensils has been found to be totally false and fictitious.
Conclusion
171. The disproportionate assets acquired by accused Vijay Kumar Puri during the check period were to the tune of Rs. 42,29,478.71 which are 81% of his known sources of income. He has failed to satisfactorily account for sources of such huge assets acquired by him. Therefore, he is found guilty of having committed the offence U/s 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
172. So far as the accused Amita Puri is concerned, the evidence on record shows that a large number of assets have been acquired in her name. It has come in evidence that she was having many joint accounts with accused Vijay Kumar Puri and there are a large number of fixed deposits in her sole name as well as held by her jointly with Vijay Kumar Puri and the two minor daughters. It has been nowhere CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 192 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. her case that she was unaware about the assets which are in her name or that she did not consent for obtaining these assets in her name. On the contrary, she had come forward with a totally false and fictitious explanation that she had acquired these assets out of sale of gold jewellery/silver articles, which also indicates that she was conscious about the fact that she is holding a large number of assets in the shape of FDRs, Saving Bank Accounts, Shares etc in her name which run into Lakhs of Rupees and which have been so obtained by her husband Vijay Kumar Puri in her name. Thus, she has consciously assisted her husband Vijay Kumar Puri in accumulating these assets in her name from the tainted money got by him during the check period and also in parking the same in various banks and private companies by way of FDRs, Shares etc. Hence, it is proved from the evidence on record that she had intentionally facilitated her husband i.e. co-accused Vijay Kumar Puri in acquisition of these disproportionate assets and also in holding the same during the check period. She is, thus, found guilty of the offence of abetment under section 109 IPC read with section 13 (2) and 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In this regard, I find support from the following observations of the Supreme Court in P. Nallamal's case (Supra):-
" 21. There is no force in the contention that the offences under Section 13(1)(e) cannot be abetted by another person. "Abetment"
is defined in Section 107 of the Penal Code as under:
107. Abetment of a thing.- A person abets the doing of a thing, who-
First.- Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 193 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
22. For the "First" clause (i.e. instigation) the following Explanation is added to the section:
"Explanation I.- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing."
23. For the "Thirdly" clause (i.e. intentionally aids) the following Explanation is added :
"Explanation 2.- Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act."
24. Shri Shanti Bhushan cited certain illustrations which, according to us, would amplify the cases of abetments fitting with each of the three clauses in Section 107 of the Penal Code vis-a-vis Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act.
The first illustration cited is this :
If A, a close relative of the public servant tells him how other public servants have become more wealthy by receiving bribes and A persuades the public servant to do the same in order to become rich and the public servant acts accordingly. If it is a proved position there cannot be any doubt that A has abetted the offence by instigation.
Next illustration is this :
Four persons including the public servant decide to raise a bulk amount through bribery and the remaining persons prompt the public servant to keep such money in their names. If this is a proved position then all the said persons are guilty of abetment through conspiracy.
The last illustration is this :CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 194 of 197
CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. If a public servant tells A, a close friend of his, that he has acquired considerable wealth through bribery but he cannot keep them as he has no known source of income to account, he requests A to keep the said wealth in A's name, and A obliges the public servant in doing so. If it is a proved position A is guilty of abetment falling under the "Thirdly" clause of Section 107 of the Penal Code.
25. Such illustrations are apt examples of how the offence under Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act can be abetted by non-public servants. The only mode of prosecuting such offender is through the trial envisaged in the PC Act. "
173. As already noted hereinabove, the evidence on record clearly shows that the two accused Vijay Kumar Puri and Amita Puri had procured 86 false/forged bills Ex. P-34 (Colly.) of different dates in the name of Amita Puri from M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore, in different amounts aggregating to Rs. 87,10,259/- purportedly against sale of gold jewellery and silver articles. This was done to provide a false explanation for the source of disproportionate assets acquired by accused Vijay Kumar Puri during the check period. However, it has been proved from the evidence on record that all those bills are fictitious and forged. It is also evident that both of these accused were involved in obtaining these forged bills. Infact, they have admitted during their respective depositions as DW9 and DW10 that they had contacted Sh. Vinesh Vyas, the Proprietor of M/s Shree Ambika Jewellers, Indore in the year 2000 and obtained these bills from him. Thus, the evidence on record on this aspect is sufficient to conclude that the two accused had entered into a criminal conspiracy with Mr. Vinesh Vyas (accused No. 3 who has since been discharged in this case by the order of the Hon'ble High Court), the object of which was CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 195 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. to get prepared and obtain these fictitious bills. Therefore, both of them are hereby held guilty of the offence under section 120B read with section 193 IPC also.
174. The accused are thus convicted as under:-
(i) Both the accused Vijay Kumar Puri and Amita Puri are convicted for the offence punishable u/s 120B read with section 193 IPC;
(ii) Accused Vijay Kumar Puri is also convicted for the offence punishable u/s 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; &
(iii) Accused Amita Puri is also convicted for the offence punishable u/s 109 IPC read with section 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
175. Before parting with, I find it necessary to put on record with immense regret that the investigation in this case has been very casual and perfunctory. The disproportionate assets found in the possession of the accused at the end of the check period would have been almost double, in case the Investigating Officer had taken pains in collecting the documents from various banks/private companies in legally admissible manner and in citing relevant witnesses in the chargesheet to prove material documents. Several investments purportedly of the accused in various banks and private companies have remained to be proved for the reason that no witness from those banks and private companies was cited in the chargesheet and no such witness was produced before the court during the course of trial to prove the documents related to those investments. Further, several other investments of the accused have also remained to be proved for CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 196 of 197 CBI v. Vijay Kumar Puri Etc. the reason that the documents related to those investments were not supported by the requisite Certificate u/s 2 (8) of the Bankers' Books Evidence Act and wherever these were computerized print outs, the requisite Certificate u/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act was not obtained. Whether this was done by the IO due to lack of knowledge about the relevant legal provisions or otherwise intentionally, remains to be seen.
Announced in the open Court Digitally signed
on this 23rd Day of September, 2019 VIRENDER by VIRENDER
BHAT
BHAT Date: 2019.09.23
15:49:04 +0530
(Virender Bhat)
Special Judge, PC Act, CBI-15
Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi
CBI No. 193/2019 Page No. 197 of 197