The Hindu : High Court upholds dropping of case against K.V. Thomas

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Apr 03, 2004

Kerala

Kerala

High Court upholds dropping of case against K.V. Thomas

By Our Staff Reporter

KOCHI, APRIL 2 . The Kerala High Court today upheld the Thrissur Vigilance Court's order dropping the proceedings in a case relating to the amassment of disproportionate assets filed against K.V. Thomas, Minister for Fisheries and Excise.

Dismissing a petition filed by Biju C. Valluvanadan seeking to review the Vigilance Court's order, Justice N. Krishnan Nair said that merely because there were allegations in a complaint against a public figure under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court was not justified in authorising an officer to conduct an investigation without reason. It could not be said that there was ground to suspect the commission of offences. Before investigation was ordered under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), the court had to satisfy that the offence had been committed prima facie. The court said that in the absence of material in support of the criticism against the order, the special judge was fully justified in accepting the Vigilance report.

According to the petitioner, the Vigilance court should have ordered registration of a crime and an investigation as provided under Section 156(3) of the CPC. The Vigilance report said that the total value of the assets held by the Minister during the `check period' was Rs. 55, 56,974 while his total income during the same period came to Rs. 88, 28,974.

During the period, he had incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs. 35, 73,890. The investigation officer had come to the conclusion that the excess of Rs. 3, 01,204 received by him was comparatively small and there was no ground for registration of a Vigilance case against him.

Dismissing a contention of the petitioner, the court observed that if a preliminary inquiry revealed that a public servant was prima facie guilty of a offence, the Vigilance officer should register a crime. On the other hand, if the allegations against a public officer were found to be baseless, the officer was not bound to register a crime, the court said.

The petitioner pointed out that the Vigilance had undervalued the price of the land and building possessed by the Minister. The petitioner pointed out that the value shown by him for 8 cents of land and building situated in Thoppumpady in Ernakulam was Rs. 8 lakhs while six cents of land at Elamakkara were valued at Rs. 3.5 lakhs. The judge said that the value had been assessed, taking into account the opinion of the Public Works Department Executive Engineer. The court said that the inquiry officer was not expected to value the properties. The petitioner was not able to produce any material to show that the properties owned by the Minster were undervalued. Besides, there was nothing on record to indicate that the assets were "undervalued and underestimated", the court said.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Kerala