Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: assets beyond in Adesh Kumar Gupta And Anr vs Cbi And Anr on 20 March, 2025Matching Fragments
(iii) The learned Standing Counsel asserted that, while serving as a public servant, petitioner No.1, in the capacity of Principal General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Faridabad, during the relevant check period spanning from 2007 to 2018, grossly abused his official position to acquire assets beyond his lawful means, thereby attracting the rigours of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "PC Act").
(iv) Countering the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner regarding procedural irregularities, the learned Standing Counsel forcefully submitted that the investigation in the instant case has been conducted in absolute compliance with the provisions of the CBI Manual. He particularly relied upon Chapter 10, Paragraph 10.16 of 9 of 23 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:040154 CRM-
The first FIR pertained to the demand of illegal gratification, punishable under the provisions of the PC Act.
10 of 23 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:040154 CRM-
CRM-M No.24651 of 2022 (O&M) 11
The second FIR related to the discovery of disproportionate assets beyond known sources of income, which squarely fell within the ambit of Section 13 of the PC Act.
20. In the earlier FIR, the prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, whereas, in the present FIR prosecution is required to prove accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income. Thus, both the FIRs cannot be said to have arisen from same transaction or set of facts.
21. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners also argued that the deletion of Section 13(1)(e) by the 2018 amendment to the PC Act rendered the present FIR untenable. However, this argument too is misconceived.