9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (7) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, Hyderabad etc., during the period from 1958 to 24.8.83, acquired assets in his name and in the names of his dependents and was found in possession of pecuniary resources of property of a value of ₹ 7,02,848.00 which was disproportionate to his known sources of income. 3. As the facts of the case are well set out in the judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court, we feel that it is not necessary to proliferate the same. 4. For the disposal of this appeal it would be sufficient, if we examine the correctness of the findings of the High Court as regards the value of the disproportionate assets, the appellant is found to have been in possession. The Trial Court on the basis of the evidence produced before it, found the value of the disproportionate assets at ₹ 3,47,601.49. On appeal the High Court has reduced the value of the disproportionate assets to ₹ 2,37,842.00. Therefore, we have to now examine as to whether there is any error in the judgment of the High Court in arriving at this disproportionate assets and whether the appellant has satisfactorily accounted this alleged disproportionate assets. 5. Mr. P.P. Rao, learned senior Counsel appearing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tem claimed to be included in the income and consequently to be deducted from the disproportionate assets is ₹ 56,240. The break up figures of this amount of ₹ 56,240 comprises of (1) ₹ 20,000 borrowed by the appellant as loan from his co-brother (PW-21); (2) another loan of ₹ 20,000 from his son-in-law Dr. K Ravindra Reddi; (3) a sum of ₹ 5,000 from his father-in-law by was of gift and (4) ₹ 11,240 from the sale proceeds of the gold necklace of the wife of the appellant. The entire amount of ₹ 56,240 was not at all given any deduction by the courts below and the claim of the appellant has been rejected. The substantiate this claim the appellant relies upon his income tax returns as well as of Dr. K. Ravindra Reddi and the Wealth Tax returns of his wife. 9. The Trial Court for the reasons given in paragraphs 6 to 14 of its judgment has rejected this claim of deduction from the disproportionate assets. 10. The appellant has strenuously challenged the findings of the Trial Court; under ground Nos.26, 27, 29, 31, 32 and 36 of his appeal memorandum filed before the High Court which read as follows: 26. The learned Judge has not given a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... three years in 1982. 12. Dr. Ravindra Reddi had shown the loan of ₹ 20,000/- to his father-in-law namely, the appellant herein in his Income Tax Returns. Similarly PW-21 had also show the loan of ₹ 20,000/- as evidenced by his income tax returns Exs. P-155 and P-111. Besides the appellant himself had shown in his Income Tax Return Ex. P-148 the receipt of the gift of ₹ 5,000/- from his father-in-law and the sale proceeds of ₹ 11,240/- obtained by the sale of the gold necklace of his wife was shown in his wife's Wealth Tax Returns Exs. P-53 to P-55. The learned Counsel for the respondent is not able to challenge the above Wealth Tax and Income Tax returns, evidently for the reason that he could not do so in the fact of the unimpeachable documents. As rightly contended by Mr. P.P. Rao, these documents could not have been manipulated and concocted anticipating this prosecution in 1983. 13. The Trial Court has brushed aside this piece of evidence on the ground that the daughter and son-in-law, Dr. Ravindra Reddi had only little experience during that period; that they had submitted their income tax returns for a consolidated period of three years in 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he locker, though it stood in the name of his daughter as benami. This contention of Mr. Madhava Reddy was opposed by Mr. P.P. Rao stating firstly that the locker could not be opened except by Dr. Indira in whose name the locker stood. Secondly, Dr. Indira was living with her husband at Pittance which is 30 Kms. away from Hyderabad where the jewellery were kept in the bank. According to Mr. Madhava Reddy, even the mother of Dr. Indira, namely, the wife of the appellant was also allowed to operate the locker. Taking into consideration of the relationship of the parties, we feel that there is nothing strange in the conduct of the daughter handing over the key to her mother at Hyderabad and also authorising her to operate the locker in the bank. Whatever it may be that nothing adverse can be safely inferred that the daughter was holding this jewellery as benami for her father. To rebut the case of the appellant that the certain jewellery was Stridhana, we do not find any material on the side of the prosecution. The evidence led by the appellant to substantiate that the jewellery of his wife were Stridhana are more acceptable. Under these circumstances, we are unable to agree with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one Shanti Devi was an asset belonging to the appellant and that Shanti Devi was a benamidar of the appellant. The learned Judge speaking for the Bench has disposed of that contention holding thus: It is well settled that the burden of showing that a particular transaction is banami and the owner is not the real owner always rests on the person asserting it to be so and this burden has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidence of a definite character which would either directly prove the fact of benami or establish circumstances unerringly and reasonably raising an inference of that fact. The essence 6f benami is the intention of the parties and not unoften, such intention is shrouded in a thick veil which cannot be easily pierced through. But such difficulties do not relieve the person asserting the transaction to be benami of the serious onus that rests on him nor justify the acceptance of mere conjectures or surmises as a substitute for proof. 20. When the facts of the present case arc tested in the light of the principle laid down in the above case, the case of benami transaction alleged by the prosecution has to fail. For the discussion made above, a total amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of acquisition as Stridbana. This submission was opposed by Mr. Madhav Reddi submitting that in the absence of any specific evidence about the date of acquisition of the gold jewellery it would not be possible for the prosecution to give the value of the gold as on that date. 23. In addition, Mr. Rao fervently pleaded that the appellant is entitled for the benefit of the Government Memo No.700/SC D/88-4 dated 13.2.89 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh giving certain guidelines to the Anti Corruption Bureau to give allowance of a reasonable margin of 20% on the total income of a Government servant while computing disproportionate assets. In support of his plea he had placed reliance on the judgment of a single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh rendered in Criminal Appeal No.450 of 1989.5. Thiremolaiah v. State of A.P. Inspector of Police II A.C. B. Karnool Range, Karnool in which the learned Judge has given the benefit of this Government Memo to the appellant therein though the appellant in that case was prosecuted in the year 1983, that is 6 years before the issue of this Memo as in the case on hand. The Government Memo relied on by the learned Counsel is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
