Corruption Charges and a Wife’s Defense: Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Ruling in State vs. Pratima Behera.
19 December 2024
Corruption >> Criminal Law | Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law
In this appeal, the State challenges the Orissa High Court's decision to discharge Pratima Behera, the wife of Anil Kumar Sethi, in a case related to the acquisition of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Anil Kumar Sethi, a public servant, was accused of amassing assets beyond his known sources of income. The investigation raised suspicion about Pratima Behera’s involvement, as assets were found in her name, and there were discrepancies regarding her Income Tax Returns.
The Trial Court had initially framed charges against Pratima Behera, citing a prima facie case, but she sought discharge under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C., claiming there was no sufficient evidence against her. The High Court, however, disagreed with the Trial Court’s decision, ruling that there was no material to show that she had abetted her husband's actions.
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court’s decision, noting that at the stage of framing charges, the court only needs to establish whether there is a prima facie case, not whether the evidence is "clinching." It criticized the High Court for improperly delving into the merits of the case and quashing the charge prematurely. The Supreme Court directed that the trial should proceed as per law and should be concluded expeditiously, considering the case's long duration.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Section 239., Code of Criminal Procedure - 1973
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973