Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.13(2), 13(1)(e) – Penal Code, 1860 – s.109 – Appellant was held guilty of abetting her then husband (main accused) in acquiring disproportionate assets – Sustainability:
Held: Admittedly, the appellant’s husband acquired assets (disproportionate to his income), during the check period, in appellant’s name – Appellant’s case falls either in the 2nd or 3rd illustration in the P. Nallammal case – After the disproportionate wealth was amassed, the appellant was actively involved in concealing such wealth by keeping assets in her name – Thus, the appellant is guilty of offence of abetment falling u/s.109, IPC r/w s.13(2) and 13(1)(e), 1988 Act – Appellant’s argument that she is no longer the wife of co-accused as he remarried, has no force because at the time of commission of offence, she was his wife – Appellant allowed the co-accused to accumulate assets in her name and thus, assisted him in accumulation of assets disproportionate to the known sources of income – Appellant was rightly convicted u/s.109 IPC r/w s.13(2) and13(1)(e), 1988 Act – Findings of both the courts below not interfered with. [Paras 14-16]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.