Harshitha Annapragada Vs State (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by a wife seeking discharge from a disproportionate assets case in which she was arrayed as an accused for abetment. The prosecution case arose from a disproportionate assets case registered against her husband, a public servant employed as Assistant Manager (Finance & Accounts) at Bharat Electronics Limited, Chennai, under the Prevention of Corruption Act. During the check period from 1 April 2017 to 4 February 2020, the investigation alleged that assets far in excess of known sources of income were acquired in the name of the husband and jointly or exclusively in the name of the petitioner wife. The prosecution asserted that she had intentionally abetted the acquisition, concealment, and holding of disproportionate assets.
The petitioner argued that there was no prima facie material to frame charges against her, claiming independent income, filing of income tax returns, financial assistance from family members, and that the properties were lawfully acquired. She contended that the investigating agency failed to consider her income, explanations, and disclosures made by her husband to the employer and tax authorities, and that mere holding of property in her name could not amount to abetment. Reliance was placed on judicial precedents stating that abetment must involve active participation, instigation, or intentional aid.
