NDLI: The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi Vs. Uttamchand Bohra

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Prevention of Corruption Act public servant
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.13(1)(e), 13(2) – A-1, a public servant was accused of accumulating assets disproportionate to his known sources of income in collusion with other accused – Respondent accused of abetting and/or conspiring with A-1 – According to the prosecution, A-1 acquired a flat, through a company – Respondent was alleged to be close associate and financer of A-1 and his family – Chargesheet against the respondent quashed by High Court – On appeal, held: Role attributed to the respondent is that he helped in the execution of the sale deed of the property which was seized from his house and that his employee witnessed the sale deed – The fact that the sale deed was in the respondent’s residence cannot satisfy the ingredient of any of the offences alleged against him – An allegation of the existence of signatures of respondent’s employee, as a witness to the sale deed cannot amount to his aiding or abetting A-1 to acquire disproportionate assets – FIR in the present case names only A-1 and A-2 (A-1’s wife) as the accused – Respondent’s name was included in the present case, although the sale deed was seized during a search conducted in relation to another FIR (in an earlier case wherein respondent was co-accused) and not in relation to the present case – The earlier case is irrelevant to the present case – Further, respondent was not a public officer or public servant – Therefore, he cannot be charged with committing an offence u/ s.13(1)(e) r/w s.13(2) – There is no allegation against the respondent that he received any benefit or that he held the property in his name for the benefit of A-1 – The property which the Company purchased was in its name – Money trail for the property bought under the sale deed, does not show respondent’s involvement – There is no material prima facie supporting an inference that the respondent was either a conspirator or had abetted the commission of theoffences alleged against A-1 – Alleged offences u/ss.120-B, 109, IPC against the respondent not made out from the chargesheet – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.120B, 109 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.397, 401, 226-228, 239, 161. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.13(1)(e), 13(2) – Penal Code, 1860 – s.120B – Criminal misconduct by public servant – Conspiracy – Standard of suspicion – Held: Material to implicate someone as a conspirator acting in concert with a public servant, alleged to have committed misconduct under the PCA or amassed assets disproportionate to a public servant’s known sources of income, has to be on firm ground.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 855
Petitioner	The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi
Respondent	Uttamchand Bohra
SCR	[2021] 9 S.C.R. 821
Judgement Date	2021-12-09
Case Number	1590

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi Vs. Uttamchand Bohra

Please Log-in to view this content

R. Sundararajan Vs. State By D.s.p., Spe, Cbi, Chennai

R. Janakiraman Vs. State Represented By Inspector of Police, Cbi, Spe, Madras

N.v. Subba Rao Vs. State, Through Inspector of Police, Cbl/spe, Visakhapatnam, A.p.

Lalu Prasad@ Lalu Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar Through Cbi (ahd) Patna

C.k. Jaffer Sharief Vs. State (through Cbi)

S.v.l.murthy Vs. State Rep. By Cbi, Hyderabad

Subbusingh Vs. State By Public Prosecutor

Union of India Through Inspector, Cbi Vs. Purnandu Biswas

The State Rep. By Cbi, Hyderabad Vs. G. Prem Raj

The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi Vs. Uttamchand Bohra

The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi Vs. Uttamchand Bohra

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

R. Sundararajan Vs. State By D.s.p., Spe, Cbi, Chennai

R. Janakiraman Vs. State Represented By Inspector of Police, Cbi, Spe, Madras

N.v. Subba Rao Vs. State, Through Inspector of Police, Cbl/spe, Visakhapatnam, A.p.

Lalu Prasad@ Lalu Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar Through Cbi (ahd) Patna

C.k. Jaffer Sharief Vs. State (through Cbi)

S.v.l.murthy Vs. State Rep. By Cbi, Hyderabad

Subbusingh Vs. State By Public Prosecutor

Union of India Through Inspector, Cbi Vs. Purnandu Biswas

The State Rep. By Cbi, Hyderabad Vs. G. Prem Raj

The State By S.p. Through The Spe Cbi Vs. Uttamchand Bohra