Brief Facts
- A discharge application was filed by a person accused of offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for having possessed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income) and the same was dismissed by the Trial Court. The Trial Court refused to consider this objection on the ground that a roving inquiry is not permissible at the stage of discharge. In this case, the accused person was 72-year-old person who had superannuated from service in the year 2010. The FIR was lodged against him after 12 years of the conclusion of the check period and the chargesheet was filed seven years thereafter.
Issues
- Nature of inquiry to be conducted while examining prima facie cases for discharge u/s 227 Cr.P.C.?
Held
- The accused person was discharged by the Apex Court while reversing the concurrent findings.
- The threshold of scrutiny required to adjudicate an application under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C., is to consider the broad probabilities of the case and the total effect of the material on record, including examination of any infirmities appearing in the case.
- What we have undertaken is not a roving inquiry, but a simple and necessary inquiry for a proper adjudication of an application for discharge. The Special Judge (Vigilance) was bound to conduct a similar inquiry for concluding that a prima facie case is made out for the Appellant to stand trial.
Relevant Para No.
- 13 & 18