Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2010 (4) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (4) TMI 1073 - SUPREME COURTAppeal u/s 378 - Whether the State Government (of Bihar) has competence to file an appeal from the judgment dated 18th December, 2006 passed by Special Judge, CBI (AHD) acquitting the accused persons when the case has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) - The charges were framed against Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav u/s 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (`PC Act’) that during the said period, he acquired assets which were disproportionate to his known sources of income and on 31st March, 1997 he had been in possession of pecuniary resources of property in his name and in the name of his wife and children to the extent of ₹ 46,26,827/- which he could not satisfactorily account for. Smt. Rabri Devi was charged u/s 109 of IPC read with Section 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the PC Act for abetting her husband in the commission of the said offence. The Court of Special Judge, CBI (AHD), upon conclusion of trial, vide its judgment dated December 18, 2006 acquitted the accused holding that prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against them. It is pertinent to notice here that as per CBI, the central government after considering the conclusions and findings of the trial court took a conscious and considered decision that no ground whatsoever was made for filing an appeal against the judgment of the trial court. On February 17, 2007 the state government, however, filed leave to appeal against the order of acquittal dated December 18, 2006 before the High Court of Judicature. HELD THAT:- In our opinion, the Legislature has maintained a mutually exclusive division in the matter of appeal from an order of acquittal inasmuch as the competent authority to appeal from an order of acquittal in two types of cases referred to in sub-section (2) is the central government and the authority of the state government in relation to such cases has been excluded. As a necessary corollary, it has to be held, and we hold, that the State Government (of Bihar) is not competent to direct its public prosecutor to present appeal from the judgment dated December 18, 2006 passed by the Special Judge, CBI (AHD), Patna. For the aforesaid conclusions, the reasons given by the High Court are not correct and the impugned order cannot be sustained. The result appeals are allowed, the order dated September 20, 2007 passed by the High Court is set aside and the Govt. Appeal No. 1 of 2007 – State of Bihar v. Lalu Prasad and others – presented before the High Court of Judicature at Patna is rejected as not maintainable.
|