Blog

TITLE K.M. Shaji Versus State of Kerala

Decided On  October 10th, 2023

8368 OF 2022

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Ziyad Raham

INTRODUCTION-

The order issued by the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge is being contested in this Crl.M.C. According to the aforementioned order, the petitioner here, who is the defendant in the aforementioned crime, was unsuccessful in obtaining the release of any funds that had been taken from his home during the investigation carried out by the second respondent in this case under Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The petitioner is a politician who was elected to the Kerala Legislative Assembly from the Azheekode constituency in 2011 and 2016. He was a candidate for the same constituency in the Assembly elections held in 2021 as well. A man named M.R. Harish complained to the Court of Special Judge under the number C.M.P.132/2020, claiming that the petitioner had accumulated wealth that was out of proportion to his known and legitimate sources of income. According to the report, the Director of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau in Thiruvananthapuram authorised the filing of a case against the petitioner, and on April 11, 2021, the aforementioned crime was officially reported under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 and Sections 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act of 2018. An inspection was carried out as part of the investigation at the “Alliance Green Villa” residence, Ottathengumanal, Alavil, Kannur, owned by the petitioner’s wife. Five documents, 16.21 gm of gold jewellery, and currency notes worth Rs. 47,35,500 were all found during the search. From the aforementioned sum, cash worth Rs. 46,35,500 was discovered hidden under a fully covered cot in the ground-floor bedroom.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

According to the petitioner’s knowledgeable attorney, he or she adequately explained where the money came from and why it was kept in the home. He claimed to have run for the Legislative Assembly in the election held on April 4, 2021. Additionally, he presented themagistrate with receipts attesting to the collection of the aforementioned sum from members of the public. He also made note of the fact that he included the aforementioned sum in the income tax return he submitted for the fiscal year 2020–2021 by paying Rs. 10,47,410 in taxes. The knowledgeable Special Government Pleader, on the other hand, would vehemently dispute the aforementioned claims. The knowledgeable Special Government Pleader also provided a thorough statement disputing the claims made in the Crl.M.C. It follows that the petitioner’s application can be viewed from that perspective because it is obvious that the second respondent’s goal is to ensure that the petitioner’s disproportionate wealth is preserved. In other words, if it is determined in the trial that the petitioner should be deprived of the said amount, it is not necessary to do so; instead, the amount can be released to the said person with the necessary conditions to ensure the recovery of the said amount without a drawn-out legal process. It is  made clear that the conclusions made by the court regarding the petitioner’s explanations of the source of the money were only made for the purposes of this Crl.M.C., and under no circumstances shall they harm the petitioner in any way. The respondents must conduct an investigation, and the magistrate must consider the petitioner’s arguments without regard to any conclusions or observations made in this order.

asked to reject the current application “PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by-  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgment