Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

vii) Loan of Rs.5 crore received frim Megacity (Bengaluru)Developers & Builders Limited (this was wrongly shown as asset instead of liability).

viii) Loan from Shrinidhi Co-opertive Society Rs.9,02,687/-

So also it is alleged that before the Lokayuktha, he submitted his Assets and Liabilities Stated for the year ending 31-03-2005 and as on 31-03-2006 as under:-

3. Based upon the aforesaid affidavit, it is alleged by the complainant in his complaint that, the accused has not shown loan amount of Rs.5crore received by him from Megacity(Bengaluru)Developers and builders Ltd., as on 31-03- 2005 and as on 31-03-2006 and by giving false information that investments of Rs.25,000 shares and 35,00,000 shares in Megacity (Bengaluru) Developers and Builders Ltd., Bengaluru and his wife invested in the said company shares worth Rs.1.5 lac. It is further alleged in the complaint that though the income of the accused ranges from 4 to 6 lakhs during the year 2003- 06, how he was able to increase LIC amount from Rs.5 lakhs as on 27-03-2004 to Rs.30 lakh as on 31-03-2005 and Rs.35 lakh as on 31-03-2006. It is further stated by the complainant that accused bought 750 grams of gold in the year 2004-2005, 2005-06 with his annual income of Rs.5 to 6 lakhs and how come he could purchase. It is further alleged that accused has not declared his Scorpio vehicle bearing No.KA-02; MF-1234 as on 31-03-2005 and 2006.

ORDER
i). The respondent has furnished false information to the Lokayuktha by not disclosing the existence of loan of more than Rs.5 crores received from Megacity (Bengaluru)Developers & builders Limited, Bengaluru as on 31-03-2005 and as on 31-

03-2006 and by giving false information that there were no liabilities in his assets and liabilities statements for the years 2004-05 and 2005-06 respectively and thereby committed offence punishable under section 177 of the Indian Penal Code.

So on scrupulous reading of the entire evidence of PW-1, it shows that the case of the prosecution suffers from material particulars, documents ought to be summoned have not been summoned. Based upon the documents produced by the complainant proceedings are initiated.

33. PW-2 is the complainant. He too, corroborates the evidence of PW .1 and material particulars. But in the cross- examination he has deposed so many ignorance. From Single sheet of Ex.P5, he cannot say as whether Mahindra Scorpio bearing Reg.No.KA-02-MF-1234 was transferred to Megacity Bangalore Builders and Developers Ltd., He did not ascertain the bank details, he did not request the Lokayuktha authority for details about Mega City Bangalore Builders and Developers. He has lodged 4 to 5 complaints before the Lokayuktha against the accused person so also before the Sampangi Ram Nagar Police Station and 3 to 4 complaints were lodged before the Registrar of Companies. His complaint before the Lokayuktha came to be rejected. He admits that Ex.P-4 is an affidavit which states the discrepancies of Assets and Liabilities Statement of the accused for the year 2004-05, 2005-06. He did not produce entire records before the Lokayuktha. Further, admits that his complaint filed was dismissed by Lokayuktha. He also filed a complaint before Lokayuktha against the accused in which investment for the year 31-12-2007 is Rs.35,00,000/- was mentioned. He further admits that an affidavit was filed before the Election Commissioner as per Ex.P4, relying on the affidavit so filed, complaint filed by him was rejected. He does not know whether accused has sold the Scorpio vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-02-MF-1234 was transferred to Megacity Bengaluru Developers and Builders Pvt Ltd., but alleges that accused has not declared his assets before the Lokayuktha. In this case documents confronted by Pws.1 and 2 do envisages that, accused in his comments has stated so many things but have not been appreciated by the Enquiry Officer. Ex.D2 is the certified copy of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Lokayuktha in W.P.NO.4972/07 dated 15-07-2009 wherein issuance of the notice by Election Commissioner to provide additional documents have been rejected. Appeal have been preferred by the Election Commissioner, but it also dismissed as per Ex.D-3. With regard to the transfer of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-02-MF- 1234 Mahindra ScorpioEx.D4 and D5 are produced. They show that the said vehicle was transferred or possession is handed over on 20-03-2004 itself. Ex.D-6 is another document. Ex.D7 is the bank statement.