Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, presided over by Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar, allowed a criminal revision application filed by Ajeetkumar S/o Ram Prabesh Singh (applicant/accused No.3) challenging the order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI Court No.7, Ahmedabad in Special CBI Case No.5 of 2021, which had rejected his discharge application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The case originated from a regular case registered by the CBI, Gandhinagar (R.C. No.0292019A0009 dated 01/07/2019) for offences under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). The charge-sheet was filed against three accused: accused No.1 and accused No.2 (husband and wife) and the applicant as accused No.3, who is the cousin of accused No.1. The CBI alleged that accused No.1 and accused No.2 acquired disproportionate assets to the extent of 124.09% during the check period (01/01/2010 to 09/07/2019) compared to their known sources of income, and the applicant was charged with abetment. The applicant filed an application (Exh.17) under Section 227 CrPC seeking discharge, which was rejected by the trial court. Aggrieved, he filed the present revision. The applicant's counsel argued that there was no prima facie evidence against him, as the charge-sheet did not contain any specific allegations of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding by the applicant. The CBI opposed the revision, contending that the applicant, being a close relative and having facilitated some transactions, was liable for abetment. The High Court analyzed the scope of Section 227 CrPC and held that at the stage of framing of charges, the court must consider whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. The court found that the charge-sheet and documents did not disclose any specific act of abetment by the applicant; mere relationship or association with the main accused was not enough. The court emphasized that abetment under Section 109 IPC requires active participation or intentional facilitation, and passive presence or lack of objection does not constitute abetment. Consequently, the court allowed the revision application, set aside the impugned order, and discharged the applicant from the case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Discharge under Section 227 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - The court must consider whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused based on the charge-sheet and documents; if no prima facie case is made out, discharge is warranted. (Paras 5-10) B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Disproportionate Assets - Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(b) - Abetment - For a person to be charged with abetment of disproportionate assets, there must be specific allegations of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding; mere relationship or association with the main accused is insufficient. (Paras 11-15) C) Indian Penal Code - Abetment under Section 109 IPC - Requirement of Mens Rea - Abetment requires active participation or intentional facilitation; passive presence or lack of objection does not constitute abetment. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant, accused No.3, is entitled to be discharged under Section 227 CrPC for lack of prima facie evidence of abetment under Section 109 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision application, set aside the impugned order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI Court No.7, Ahmedabad in Special CBI Case No.5 of 2021, and discharged the applicant from the case.
Law Points
- Discharge under Section 227 CrPC
- Prima facie case
- Abetment under Section 109 IPC
- Disproportionate assets under Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
- Standard of proof at charge stage
