TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 341
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1988 (in short PC Act, 1988) against Sri. Chandrashekar Kakkeri, S/o Late Amarappa Kakkeri, aged 57 years worked as Assistant Executive Engineer, Karnataka Irrigation Corporation Limited, Gamndori Canal Project Sub- Division, Mahagauv, Kalaburagi Taluk & District and presently retired residing at House No. 213/1,"ASWINI NILAYA" NGO Colony, Jevargi Road, Kalburgi. Sri. Chandrashekar Kakkeri was trapped on 28/07/2010 while accepting Rs. 4 lakhs of illegal gratification at his residence and the said bribe amount was seized by Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Kalburgi. 3. On completion of the investigation, the Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Gulbarga filed Charge Sheet no. 03/2015 dated 25.02.2015 before the District Principal Sessions (Special) Court, Kalburgi against the said officer for an offence under the Sections 13(1) (e ) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988. 4. As per charge sheet, Sri Chandrashekar Kakkeri joined government service on04/05/1984 as Assistant Engineer, Special Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Karnataka. 5. The allegations against him were that from 04/05/1984 to 27/07/2010 having worked in different places of irrigation departmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was purchased or acquired from the proceeds of the crime. The comprehensive details are mentioned in the Impugned Order dated 20.12.2016. 11. It was pleaded by the appellants that the Provisional Attachment Order No.17/2016 in ECIR No. 01/BGZO/2016 under section 5(1) of PMLA Act,2002 has been based purely and only on FIR in crime no.09/2010 registered by Karnataka Lokayukta and also charge sheet No.03/2015 dated 25.02.2015 filed by Karnataka Lokayukta under section 13(1) (e ) & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 12. The Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the Provisional Attachment Order No. 17/2016 on FIR in crime no.09/2010 registered by Karnataka Lokayukta and also charge sheet No.03/2015 dated 25.02.2015 filed by Karnataka Lokayukta under section 13(1) (e ) & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Against the said order, the present appeals were filed. Replies to the appeals were filed. The stand taken by the respondent remains the same as taken before the Adjudicating Authority, who is supporting the impugned order. 13. During the pendency of the appeals and prosecution complaint under Section 45 of the Act, the Judgement was delivered on 21.04.2017 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otal assets held by the accused and his family members as per prosecution Rs,83,82,877/- The items liable to be deleted Rs. 78,121/- 1. Difference of valuation of the house bearing No.213/1 situated at N.G. Colony, Kalaburagi Rs.1,63,000/- 2. Plot No.14 formed in Sy.No.95/1 situated at Maka Layout,Kalaburagi acquired by the wife of the accused viz. Basavarajeshwari from her individual income Rs.1,63,000/- 3. Plot No.845 situated at Dariyapur-GDA Plot, Kalaburagi Rs.34,410/- 4. Sy.No.58/1 measuring 4 acres 28 guntas situated at Vankihal village Rs.1,65,000/- 5. Plot No. 436/2 situated at Sangareddy village. Rs.20,000/- 6. Bank balance in S.B. Account held at Canara Bank i.e. Station Bazar Branch, Kalaburagi Rs.81,429/- 7. Bank balance in S.B. Account held at K.G.B. Karuneshwar Nagar Branch, Kalaburagi Rs.6,578/- 8. Bank balance in S.B. Account held at S.B.H. Vidya Nagar Branch, Kalaburagi Rs.2,31,5550/- 9. Deposit kept in K.G.B. Karuneshwar Nagar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. Difference of Family expenditure Rs.4,14,717/- TOTAL Rs.5,67,081/- Rs.4,04,2295/- (-) Rs. 5,67,081/- = Rs.34,75,214/- ANNEXURE-C Known source of income of the accused as per the prosecution as shown in the charge sheet Rs.52,73,662/- The items of income to be added 1. Agricultural income Rs.23,28,087/- 2. Rental income Rs.2,27,400/- TOTAL Rs.25,55,487/- Grand total Rs. 52,73,662/- + Rs. 25,55,487/- = Rs.78,29,149/- ANNEXURE-D a) Total assets held by the accused as determined by the Court Rs.49,31,307/- b) Total expenditure incurred as determined by the Court Rs.34,75,214/- Total: Rs.84,06,521/- c) Known sources of income of the accused as determined Rs.78,29,149/- d) Disproportionate assets held by the accused Rs.5,77,372/- "61. Thus, it is evident from the above table that only a sum of Rs. 5,77,372/- approximately remains unexplained which is less than 10% of the total income of the accused. In a decision reported in AIR 988 SC 88 (State of Maharashtra Vs. Pollonji Darabshaw Darguwalla), the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under: ".......
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was acquitted from the schedule offence and no appeal was filed, the attached properties are liable to be released. 17. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that one of the reason for quashing the PMLA complaint is that the amendment to the provisions of section 8(3)(b) of PMLA Act with effect from 15.02.2013 are as under:- Prior to 15.02.2013 "The following clause substituted by the Prevention of Money - laundering (Amendment) Act,2002 (2 of 2013), which came into effect from 15 February, 2013." (b) "become final after the guilt of the person is proved in the trial court and order of such trial court becomes final." After 15.02.2013 (b) "becomes final after an order of confiscation is passed under sub section (5) or sub-section (7) of section 8 or section 58B or sub-section (2A) of section60 by the Adjudicating Authority." 18. It is argued that the provisions of section 8(3)(b) of PMLA Act, 2002 are existed and prevailing as on the date of FIR/ date of search were of the year 2010. The amended provisions of PMLA Act, 2002 are only applicable to cases which are registered/ initiated/ booked on or after 15.02.2013. The said ame....