Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Criminal Revision Application filed by Ajeetkumar S/o Ram Prabesh Singh (applicant/original accused No.3) against the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) 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 rejected his discharge application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The background of the dispute is that a regular case (R.C. No.0292019A0009) was registered by the CBI 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) against three accused. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were husband and wife, and the applicant was accused No.3, being the cousin of accused No.1. The CBI alleged that during the check period from 01.01.2010 to 09.07.2019, accused Nos.1 and 2 acquired disproportionate assets amounting to 124.09% of their known sources of income, and the applicant was charged for abetting the same. The applicant filed an application (Exh.17) under Section 227 CrPC seeking discharge, which was rejected by the trial court. Aggrieved, the applicant preferred the present revision. The legal issues considered were whether there was any prima facie evidence against the applicant to frame charges, particularly regarding abetment of disproportionate assets. The applicant's counsel argued that there was no evidence, even prima facie, to show that the applicant abetted the acquisition of disproportionate assets; the applicant was merely a cousin and co-owner of some properties, which did not amount to abetment. The CBI contended that the applicant was involved in the acquisition of assets and that the trial court had correctly found a prima facie case. The court analyzed the material on record, including the charge sheet and documents, and found that there was no specific evidence of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding by the applicant. The court held that mere relationship or joint ownership of assets does not constitute abetment under Section 109 IPC or under the PC Act. The court emphasized that at the stage of Section 227 CrPC, the court must see if a strong suspicion exists; if not, discharge is warranted. The court concluded that the trial court had erred in rejecting the discharge application. The decision allowed the revision application, set aside the impugned order, and discharged the applicant from the case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Discharge under Section 227 - Standard of Proof - The court must consider whether a strong suspicion exists against the accused based on the material on record; if no prima facie case is made out, discharge is warranted. Held that the trial court's rejection of discharge was erroneous as there was no evidence of abetment by the applicant (Paras 5-10). B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Disproportionate Assets - Abetment - Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(b) and Section 109 IPC - For abetment of disproportionate assets, there must be material showing that the accused instigated or conspired with the public servant. Held that mere relationship or presence of assets in joint names does not constitute abetment without specific evidence (Paras 11-15). C) Indian Penal Code - Section 109 - Abetment - Requirement of Active Participation - Abetment requires intentional aiding or instigation; passive association or familial ties are insufficient. Held that the applicant, being a cousin and co-owner of some assets, cannot be charged without proof of mens rea or active role (Paras 16-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Special Judge erred in rejecting the discharge application of the applicant-accused No.3 under Section 227 CrPC when there was no prima facie evidence to show that the applicant abetted the acquisition of disproportionate assets by the main accused.
Final Decision
The court allowed the revision application, set aside the impugned order dated 09.01.2023, and discharged the applicant from Special CBI Case No.5 of 2021. Rule made absolute.
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
