TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008 (10) TMI 728 - SUPREME COURT] , while dealing with said expression, it was observed that For the public servant, whatever return he gets of his service, will be the primary item of his income. Other income which can conceivably be income qua the public servant will be in the regular receipt from (1) his property, or (b) his investment. In the instant case, every single amount received by the appellant has been proved on record through the testimony of the witnesses and is also supported by contemporaneous documents and intimations to the Government. It is not the case that the receipts so projected were bogus or was part of a calculated device. The fact that these amounts were actually received from the sources so named is not in d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecial Sessions Trial No. 4 of 1996 against the appellant herein. 2. The appellant joined the services of Public Health Engineering Department of the State of Madhya Pradesh on 15.07.1978 as Assistant Engineer and thereafter served in various capacities. According to the prosecution, during the period of 15.07.1978 to 9.02.1994, the appellant had earned total amount of Rs.3,86, 966/- as public servant but he was found to be in possession of assets worth Rs.7,97,243/- at the end of that period and as such he was in possession of assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.4,08,077/-. Accordingly Crime No. 17 of 1994 was registered on 9.02.1994 by the Special Police Establishment, Lokayukta Sanghthan for the off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 14.11.1991. d. In the year 1987, the appellant wanted to purchase a plot of land, for which he took a loan of Rs.20,000/- from PW-6 Ramji Lal Agarwal, a friend and resident of the same area, which was intimated to the Department vide letter dated 03.09.1987. e. In the year 1988-1989, the appellant had applied for a construction loan which had not been sanctioned by the Department till then. To ensure continuous construction work, he took loans or received gifts from his close relative, details of which were reflected in his letter to the department dated 15.12.1989. The details being:- (i) On 09.09.1988 and 01.04.1989 he received gifts in cash of the amounts Rs.20,000/- and Rs.15,000/- from his brother PW 7 Brij Narayan and on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t would stand reduced to the sum of Rs.37,605/-. 5. The Trial Court held that the prosecution had established the case against the appellant and thus by its judgment and order dated 30.12.2005 convicted the appellant under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13 (2) of the Act and sentenced him to suffer 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 15,000 in default whereof to undergo further sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 1 year. 6. While dealing with Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant, the High Court took the view that Rules 14, 17 and 19 of the M.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 ( the Rules for short) prohibit the public servant from accepting gifts or loan except in the manner prescribed therein. It was obs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. State of A.P. 2008 (17) SCC 83, it was submitted that the loans and gifts received by the petitioner would not constitute known sources of income as defined under Section 13(1) (e) of the Act. 10. The expression known sources of income in Section 13(1) (e) of the Act has two elements, first the income must be received from a lawful source and secondly the receipt of such income must have been intimated in accordance with the provisions of law, rules or orders for the time being applicable to the public servant. In N. Ramakrishnaiah (Supra), while dealing with said expression, it was observed:- For the public servant, whatever return he gets of his service, will be the primary item of his income. Other income which can conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the appellant has been proved on record through the testimony of the witnesses and is also supported by contemporaneous documents and intimations to the Government. It is not the case that the receipts so projected were bogus or was part of a calculated device. The fact that these amounts were actually received from the sources so named is not in dispute. Furthermore, these amounts are well reflected in the Income Tax Returns filed by the appellant. In similar circumstances, the acquisitions being reflected in Income Tax Returns weighed with this court in granting relief to the public servant. In M. Krishana Reddy Vs. State 1992(4) SCC 49. It was observed in Para 14 :- ..Therefore, on the face of these unassailable documents i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
