Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Veri-C-2/2013 regarding the illegal promotion/ raising disproportionate assets beyond his known source of income. The matter is under probe with the Vigilance

story, respondent No.1 was working as a Patwari and had assets beyond the known sources of his income. It is the prosecution case that

before the High Powered Committee to conclude that the officer possessed assets beyond his known source of income. 30. This now takes

trial Court. 12. The prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the benefit of doubt goes in favour of the accused/appellant ... check period 01.01.2003 to 25.02.2010. It was proved as follows : 1 Assets at the beginning of the check period Rs.18,17,313.00 2 Assets

wife had not disclosed in his assets and liability statements about the possession of 90 sovereign jewels. 13. The prosecution has well established through ... documents the charge against the accused regarding his possession of disproportionate assets beyond the known source of income. The trial Court has properly appreciated

wife had not disclosed in his assets and liability statements about the possession of 90 sovereign jewels. 13. The prosecution has well established through ... documents the charge against the accused regarding his possession of disproportionate assets beyond the known source of income. The trial Court has properly appreciated

answering respondents, if possible and siphon monies, funds and or assets beyond the answering respondents and the said RCFL in whose favour inter alia

Corruption Act, 1988. 2. With the allegations of accumulation of assets beyond known source of income by the petitioner who was working as the Planning ... period from 01.05.1982 to 29.12.1995 , he committed criminal misconduct acquiring disproportionate assets to a tune of Rs.14,38,435/- which, he could not account

writ application, has now been dismissed from service for possessing disproportionate assets beyond his means, on conclusion of the departmental proceeding. In view

Asset within the time limit as specified in section 54 . (vi) The Sale deed/possession of the New Asset was delayed by DLF beyond ... Original Asset in the construction of New Asset before the expiry of stipulated 3 year period from sale of Original Asset, therefore, conditions of section