The High Court · 2025

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL APPEA L No.595 OF 20.3 JUDGMENT: This Criminai Appeal is filed questioning tlre acquittal lor the offence under Section 13(l)(e) rlw 13(21 r I' prevention of Corruption Acr, 1988 (for short, ..the Act,') of the Respondent/Ar:c: rsed Olficer herein, vide -jrrdgment dzrtccl 31.72.2012 in O.C.No.11 of 2OOZ on the file i t' the iearnecl I Additional Speci,rl Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hvcierabad ([or short, "the tri:rl Court"), after obtaining pernr ssiorr liom tl-re Government vidr Memo No.22ZS /VC1(1)/2O0S <ltr.ed 22.O4.2013 of Health, Medir:;rl & Family Welfare (VC 1) Depar rnent.

2. Heard Mr. l,lazeeruddin Khan, learned couu s<,1 representing Mr.T.Bala Moharr Reddy, learned Standing Courrsel and Special Public Prosecutor for Appellant-ACB and Mr-.l].'Ihim mareclcl,v, learned counsel representing Mr.A.Visu'anath, (,ilrned cortnsel for respon dent. 3 The brief lacts of the case are that respor ,ient AO joined the Governmenr Service on 16.O2.I926 as ,\ssistant Civil Sttrgeon in thr: tr.S.1. Dispensan,, Sirpr-rr l.hagazr-ragar of Adilabad District and he \\,as prorroted as tl i, Dc,pr_rtv Civil ') '\- Surgeon on 01.03.1999 and then, as the Civil Surgeon on

25.08.2003 and subsequently, he was further promoted as the D.M. & H.O. and posted at Mahabubnagar on 01.10.2O03. He was trapped on 31.01.20O5 by the ACB oflicials when he accepted a bribe ol Rs.6,0OO/- from one Medical Officer of the Primary Health Centre, Burgula 1n Mahabubnagar District. following which, his rented house at Himayathnagar, Hvderabad where his wife and son were residing and also another rented house at l(amala Nehru Colony, Mahabubnagar a place of his employment, wherein he was then residing were searched by the ACB Officials. In pr.rrsuance of Ex P1 search proceedings under Section 165 Cr.P.C. PW53, the then Inspector of ACB, Mahabubnagar District, conducted the search of the rented house of the AO at Himayathnagar, Hvderabad from 5:00 P.M. to 12:30 A.M. in the midnight on 3l .01 .2005 in the presence of PWI and another mediator one Sri Venkateshwarlu (LW2), u'ho u,ere secured from the Department of the Central Designs Organization, Hyderabad and inventoried all the articles found in that house as was done under Ex P2 and a total cash of Rs.2,93,500/- and also the gold jewellery found in that house were seized. The silver articles and other household articles u,ere also inventoried, but they rvere gir.en back to the inmates of the -,,-. .ry ...* TElrr. g,/ -) said house. Exs. P69 to P9O made up liles consr ;ting ol sevcral - documents and some video cassettes and a dian, r ere also seized under Ex P3 scarch list. The DSP, ACB, H1 lerabad range, Hvderabad who laid the trap at Mahabubnergar along r,r,ith tu,o inspectors of ACB also conducted the simultanc,rr-ts searches in the rented house of the AO in Kamala Neh ru Nagar, Mahabubnagar on 31.0I.2005 upto OB:00 P.M, irr the pre sence of PW2 and LW3 Sri R. Devanand, the two mediato r; secured from the office of the Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, lvdcrabad, and conducted invcrtory under Ex P4 and he seize,I a net cash of Rs.5,OO0/- contirining in three envelops under th' cover of Ex P5 search list +. Bzrsing upon these inventories, a prelimi r:rn estimation s,as made to knou' that the AO possessed t I r: assets s'orth Rs.37 ,32,760 I ln disproportionate to his inco rre from knos'n sources and aftor the receipt of Ex P92 authoriz rtion letter from the Joint Director, ACB, Hyderabad on 04 1).1.2005, Pw53 registerccl Ex P')3 F.l.R. on 05.03.2005 against t he AO for the offence under St:ction 13(1)(e) r/u, Section 13(2) c l' the Act 1 )

5. PW53 obtrLined the search warrants from t rr: Court ar-td on

09.03.2005 lrorn 7:00 A.M. to 8:30 A.M. PWS I conclucted the 1 '\_-',, 1N8- search of the rented house of the AO in flat No.4O1, Arunodayat'.., Apartments, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad in the presence of the AO along with two mediators namely, Sri Venkateshwara Rao and Sri Arjun, under Ex P94 search urarrant and they verified the articles lying in that house with reference to Ex P2 and found them tallied under Ex P96 inventorry proccedings anci Ex P95 search List was also prepared. The AO \\ras arrested on

09.03.2005 and r,r,as produced bcfore tl-re Court for the judicial remand

6. On the same daJ., PW54 along uith PW3 ancl LW6/ Sri T.Hanumanthu, the t',r,o mediators, intended to conduct simultaneous search at the own house of the AO in Subashnagar, Nizamabad from 7:OO A.M., in the presence of lhe brother in-lan' of the AO, by name Sri Laxma Redd-v under Ex 6 search list, but thc said house was found locked and accordingi,l , trx P7 report u'as prepared to the effect of mentioning of the fact that the lock of the house was sealed. Again on I 1.03.2005, the said Laxma Reddy was present and in his presence the seals rvere opened bv PW54 and he conducted inventory of that house under trx P8- inventory proceedings and some important documents relating to the AO vvere seized under Ex P9 search list. -e{fr'{"rCfFe'r e :'!'s!3' :' 5 )

7. PW55 tool< up further investigation on O5.Og.20O5 in pursuarce of Ex P97 authorization letter issued lr. rhe Additional Direct.r General of ACB, Hyderabad and, duri.r l ther course or' rnvestigation, I're collected the information fro, thc vari.us sources about tlie assets, income and expenrlir u re of the AO during the check period from 16.O2.1976, the dir . on u,hich tl.re AO joined in the Government Service to 09.03.20 15, tl-re date on ri hich the sear<:h:s u,ere conducted ald the AO u,r s arre sted.

8. After the completion of the investigation, [),\r55 u as of thc vie'"r, that the At) possessed eighteen (18) itenr; mentioned in Annexure I, appended to the charge sheet which r,-e.re of the total value oI Rs.l]0,24,O58.64/- ps and as ag€r I,t st the totarl cxpencliturc of tl-re AO at Rs.40,5g,644 / - incttr re.d lt_r, the AO during the chccl.: period as shou,s in Annexure t I of the charge sheet, the AO had income from different sourttr.s to a tune of. Rs.36>,1 1,6601 tnl.y and thus he had excess r:xpencliture of Rs.4,43,98a/- arLd bv aclding this excess expendr ure to the total 'alue ol' the asst:ts possessed bv the AO, the t. al of tl.re assets of Rs.3-1,,58, 042.65 /- ps was assessed t),. pW55 as the value oI- the ass,:ts ts disproportionate to the in,:ome of the AO from tl-re knrlr r-l-- S,ources ancl thus, the r alue of tlte 'ah_re 6 disproportionate assets acquired by the AO bir corrupt and- dubious means for which he could not account for satisfactorilv.

9. The prosecution obtained trx P60 permission from the Gorrernment from the criminal prosecution of thc AO. During the pendency of the investigation, the AO retired from the service on 3l .12.2005 on attaining superannuation. Subsequentll', PW55 filed the charge sheet alleging that the AO committed the offence under Section I 3(1)(e) r/vv Section 1 3(2) of the Acl.

10. This case s,as taken on file under Sectior-r 13(1)(e) r/r.r Section f 3(2) of the Act against the AO by this Court and on the appcarance of the AO before the Court, the copies of the charge sheet and all the annexures thereto were furnished to him in strict compliance of Section 2O7 of Cr.P.C.

11. The AO was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C. and after hcaring the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learneC counsel for the AO and on the consideration of the entire material placed by the prosecution, a charge under Sectior.r 13(1)(e) r/n' Section 13(2) of the Act was framed against the AO and the said charge was read over and explained to him under Section 2aOQl ol Cr.P.C. and the AO, having understood the same, denied the :t'*":ffigfryz 7 offbnce, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be ir ied. The AO is delended by his counsel.

12. During thc course of trial, on behalf of t:rc prosecution PWs. I to 55 u,er-e e.xamined and Exs.pl to p1O 1 rr, :re marked. Ur.r behalf of the deft:nce, DWs. I to 3 were examinecl and Exs.D I to D7 were rnarker,. Upon careful consideration .. thc orai and documentarn evrrlence, the trial Court vide impLr qrred judgment lound the Ao not guirtv of the allegecr offences an( acqLlirtecr rrim. Aggrieved by rlt -. samc, the appellar-rt preferrr r.1 the present Appeal.

13. Learned rounsel for appellant subm Ls that respondent AO Cid not file the Annual pr.ipertv Retlrrr-r Statements to de:lare his income in the IT returr-r;; that the trial court failed to irppreciate the evidence ava abr , on record in proper perspecr,\,e and erroneously passed I he rmpugned judgment. Hence. he seeks to allou, the Criminal A rpeal

14. Learned counsel lor respondent contend,s that the trial court rrpon carc fur co,sideration of the materl r I ar.airable o. record in proper perspective, rightly passed rhe impugned judgment and in terlerence of this Court, at thi ; stage, 1s l1o t u arrantcd There irre, he seeks to dismiss the Crin. inal Appeal.- E

15. On carelul scrtttiny of the oral and documentary evidence.\.-\ ={' the trial Court observed that an amount of Rs. 1,06.66,827 I - is 1 calculated as the total income of the AO during the check period ar-rd after deducting the total expenditure of thc AO durir-rg the che ck period at Rs.4O,09,512 I - from the totai income, the total amount of the savings of the AO during the check period is ascertained at RS.66,57,315/- (Rs.1,06,66,827 - Rs.40,09,512 - Rs.66,57,315). The total value of the assets of the AO is estimated at Rs.25,23,595/- and if the total value of the assets is deducted from the total savings of the AO at Rs.66,57,315/ ' the AO has got the excess savings of Rs.41,33,720/-. Since, the AO has got excess savings than the value of the assets possessed by him, the assets of the AO cannot be taken as the assets acquired in disproportionate to his income from known sorrrces and thr-ts' the AO is not liable for the offence alleged offences. Stating thus, the trial Court rendered its judgment.

16. It is rvell settled law that in an appeal against acquittal, the appcllate Court is circumscribed by the limitation that no interference has to be made with the order unless the approach made by the trial Court to the consideration of evidence is vitiated by some manifest illegality or the conclusion recorded by it is such. u,hich could not have been possibly arrived at by any !*rffiBm- V 9 t ! I I Court acting reiLsonablv and judiciousl,y and is tl-rerefore, to be charactertzed as per\rerse. There is no embargo rn the appellate Court reviewing the evidence upon which an ord .r of acquittal is based. Ge,erall',', the order or acquittal shall r- rt be interfered u,ith because LIre presumption ol innocence of the a<:cr_rsed is further strengt)r:ned b,\' acquittal. The goiden th r:ad *,hich rlrns tl-rrough thc rv.lr of administratio. of justice in t r.iminar cases is that if tr'r o vicu s are possible op the evidence rrdduct:d in the case, one poinriirg to the guilt of the accusecl ar.rc the otlter to his innocence, the'ie*'which is favolrrable to the ac 'rrsed shourd be adopted. 77 ln Mrlnal D6rs ys. State of Tripurat the \ltex Court held as under "It is cleirr- that in an appeal against accl _rittal in the abscnce (,f pcrvcrsit]- ir-r the judgmenr ttnd order, interferenr e bv this Court exercising its c r,r raordinary jr-rrisdictton, is not $,arranted. Hou,ever, if .he appeai is heard bv an appellate court, being tlee ii ni rl court of fact, is ful v competent to re appreciate, rr:,:onsider and revierv the evidence and take its ou,n decis on. In other r .ords, lzru does not prescribe any limitatto r, restriction or condit, otr on exercise of such po\.\ rr and the '(:0tt)qsct l:q .-.. ':: ..- \- t0 appellate court is free to arrive at its o'*,n conclusion keeping in mind that acquittal provides for presumption in favour of the accused. The presumption of innocence is ar.ailable to the person and in criminal jurisprudence evcn' person is presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guiltl' b,1, the competent court. I[ t'uvo reasonable vieu.s are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court shouid not disturb the findings of acquittal. There is no limitation on the part of the appellatc court to revieu, the evidence upon u,hich the order of acquittal is found and to come to its ou,n conclusion. The appellate court can also review the conclusion arrived at bv the trial Court with respect to both facts and law. While dealing with the appeal against acquittal preferred by the State, it is the duty of the appellate court to marshal the entire evidence on record and only by giving cogent and adequate reasons set aside the judgment of acquittal. An order o[ acquittal is to be interfered with only when there are "compelling and substantial reasons" for doing so. if the order is "clearl_r, unreasonable", it is a compelling reason for interference. When the trial Court has ignored the cvidence or misread the material evidence or has igrrored material documents like declaration/ report of ballistic experts etc., the appellate court is competent to reverse the decision of the trial CourL depending on the materials placed." t'

18. In Maloth Somaraju Vs. State o.f Andhr t pradeshz tl-re Apex Court held that there can be no tq,o opilri rns that merelv because the acquittal is lound to be vvrong and :r tothcr vieu. can be taken, the ludgment of acquittal cannot be upset. The appellate Court lras more and serious responsibil t-r u.hile dealing *ith the judgmcnt of acquittal and unless the uLr quitttrl is found to be perverse o- not at all supportable and whcrr. the appellate Court comes to the conclusion that conviction is a must, the judgment of acquittal cannot be upset. Tl-re app .llate Court has to examine as ro u.hether the trial Court, u.hill, upsetting the acquittal, has ta<en such care.

19. Having rer;ard to the submissions of br th the learned counsel and up,trr careful scrutinv of the mater ial available on record, this Corrrt is of the opinion that the tr:il Court, in its judgment has clearlv stated that the AO has fi ed the attested copies of the Ar rr-rual property Return Statemcn s submitted by him to his depa.tment rn,hich are clul,y certified l:r. the concerned Medical oflicers o[ the respective statio,s wherr the Ao worked during the checll period. Moreo'er, the total valu,. ,f the assets of the AO is estimated at Rs.24,23,595/- and if the ,ral value of the assets is dedtictecl from the total savings : t- the AO at I(l()Il)8S(C6r) ..'.:.:'':. 'x*,. \ t2 Rs.66,57,315/ , it was found that the AO has got \. tne excess \ savings ol Rs.41 ,33,720 1 . As the AO has got excess savings than the value of the assets possessed by him, the assets of the AO cannot bc taken as the assets acquired in disproportionate to his income from knou n sources. In vieu of the Judgments referred to above and for the aforesaid reasons, I am of the view that there are no merirs in this Crirninal Appeal and the same is liabte to be dism i sscd. 20 Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, I\4iscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed a SD/. N.SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR /,TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To, 'of Police, Cni"i Juag" C'ty Civil Court' Hydlrabad (with records' if any)

1. The First Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases cum V Additional Rnti Corruption Bureau' Hyderabad Range' Z. in" inrp"""to, 3. o;; ct t; N,ti r art, Mohan Reddv(sc FoRlcB SPL PP TS) [oPUC] ;. O;" CC to Mr. A. Viswanath, Advocate [OPUCI 5. Two CD CoPies Mahabubunagar District. ' Kam/PSL P- HIGH COURT DATED:2610612025 /a 20 lE? 206 '-d. ..;.' JUDGMENT CRLA.No.595 of 2013 DISMISSING OF THE CRIMINAL APPEAL "-ft[$w