N. RAMAKRISHNAIAH (DEAD) THR. LRS. versus STATE OF A.P.

Citation: [2008] 14 S.C.R. 733 · Decided: 17-10-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

I 
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 733 
<' 
~ 
N. RAMAKRISHNAIAH (DEAD) THR. LRS. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF A.P. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1628 of 2008) 
OCTOBER 17, 2008 
B 
-f 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ] 
') 
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947: 
~ 
s.5(1)(e) rlw s.5(2) - Public servant - Acquiring assets c 
disproportionate to his known sources of income - Conviction 
by trial court - Certain assets of accused directed to be sold 
in public auction and sale proceeds confiscated to Govern-
ment - Judgment and order upheld by High Court - HELD: 
Analysis made by trial court and High Court, and evidence on 
record leave no manner of doubt that conviction and sentence D 
.. 
suffer from no infirmity 
-~ 
, 
s. 5 - "Income" - Connotation of - Interest accrued on 
deposits - Since total income and expenditure formed basis 
of computation, accrued income duly taken note of - If it is E 
excluded , income earned would be reduced to that extent - It 
would not be a factor in favour of accused. 
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: 
s. 13(1)(e) rlws.13(2) ands.5(1)(e) rlws.5(2) of1947 Acts 
F 
i7 
- Expressions "income': "known sources of income': "satis-
factorily account for" - Connotation of - Burden is on the ac-
cused to offer a plausible explanation worthy of acceptance 
as to how he acquired the wealth - Prevention of Corruption 
Act, 1947 - s.5(1)(e) rlw s.5(2) - Evidence Act, 1872- s. 106. 
~-
--
~ 
The appellant-accused, an Executive Engineer in the G 
State Panchayat Raj Department, was prosecuted for com-
mission of offences punishable uls 5(1 )(e) read with s.5(2) 
of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the allega-
733 
H 
734 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 
A 
tion that during the service period he had acquired as-
sets disproportionate to his known sources of income. 
The Special Judge convicted the accused of the offences 
charged and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for 
one year and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-. Certain assets, 
s belonging to the accused were also directed to be sold in 
public auction and the sale proceeds confiscated to the 
State. The High Court upheld the judgment and order of 
the Special Judge. Aggrieved, the accused filed the in-
stant appeal. During pendency of the appeal, consequent 
c upon death of the appellant, his heirs were brought on 
record. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The expression "known sources of in-
D come" means income received from any lawful sources, 
the receipt of which has been intimated in accordance 
with the provisions of any law, rules or orders for the time 
being applic'able to a public servant. The expression 
"known source of income" has reference to sources 
E 
known to the prosecution after thorough investigation of 
the case. The prosecution cannot, in the very nature of 
things be expected to know the affairs of an accused per-
son. Those will be matters "specially within the knowl-
edge" of the accused, within the meaning of Section 106, 
F 
of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. [para 14) [7 40-C-E] 
1.2 The emphasis of the phrase "known sources of 
income" in Section 13(1) (e) of the Prevention of Corrup-
tion Act, 1988 (Section 5(1) (e) of 1947 Act) is clearly on 
the. word "income." It would be primary to observe that 
G qua the public servant, the income would be what is at-
tached to his office or post, commonly known as remu-
neration or salary. Other income which can conceivably 
be income qua the public servant will be in the regular 
receipt from (a) his property, or (b) his investment. A re-
H ceipt from windfall, or gains of graft, crime or immoral se-
_,_
\ 
J 
N. RAMAKRISHNAIAH (DEAD) THR. LRS. v. 
735 
STATE OF A.P. 
-~ 
cretions by persons prima facie would not be receipt for A 
the "known sources of income" of a public servant. [para 
15] [740-F; 741-8] 
1.3 The legislature has advisedly used the expres-
sion "satisfactorily account." The emphasis must be on B 
the word "satisfactorily" and the legislature has, thus, · 
-I deliberately cast a burden on the accused not only to of-
fer a plausible explanation as to how he came by his large 
wealth, but also to satisfy the Court that his explanation 
• 
was worthy of acceptance. [para 16] [741-C] 
c 
2.1 In the instant case, one of the items as far as in-
come is concerned was interests on deposits. The High 
Court noted that the same related to interest accrued on 
deposits. Since total income and expenditure formed the 
basis of computation, the accrued income has
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.