Issues
- Whether the accused can be discharged from the allegations of the offense under Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act when no incriminating material have been found during the investigation?
- What should be the approach of the courts before framing the charges in criminal proceedings? Whether the court is required to consider the broad probabilities of the case at the time of framing of the charge?
Held
- The accused was discharged by the Apex Court.
- During the investigation, no incriminating material or money was seized from the house of the Appellant. Further, it is not a case where allegations of illegal gratification or disproportionate assets have been successfully found by the prosecution against the Appellant. On the contrary, when the Income Tax Department had assessed the block income tax return for seven years, the Department recorded a refund of Rs. 8843 to the Appellant after detailed scrutiny of the records.
- It is a well-settled law that at the time of framing of the charges, the probative value of the material on record cannot be gone into but before framing of charge, the Court must apply its judicial mind on the material placed on record and must be satisfied that the commission of the offense by the accused was possible. Indeed, the Court has a limited scope of inquiry and has to see whether any prima facie case against the accused is made out or not. At the same time, the Court is also not expected to mirror the prosecution story but to consider the broad
probabilities of the case, weight of prima facie evidence, documents produced, and any basic infirmities, etc.
Relevant Para No.
- 17 & 18