the assets owned by him in his name and in the name of his family members at the end of the check period was Rs.11,84,325/-. The income of the appellant during this period was Rs.5,06,144/-. It was estimated that he ought to have incurred an expenditure of Rs.4,55,323/-. Therefore, his likely savings could have been Rs.50,820/-. Therefore, as per Statement No.VII, the value of the assets acquired during this period disproportionate to the known sources of income was assessed at Rs.9,94,373.50/-. This was said to be 196.5% in excess of the appellant's known sources of income. Based on the source income, Crime No.7 of 2005 was registered on the file of the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Nagercoil on 17.09.2005 (Ex.P37). Investigation was conducted and the statement of the accused was also obtained. Since the explanation furnished by the accused was not found to be convincing, final report came to be filed before the Jurisdictional Court. Cognizance was taken and summons were issued to the appellant. On his appearance, copies were served. Charges were framed for having committed the offences under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.24 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P.43. The accused examined himself as D.W.2. His brother-in-law Sheik Abdul Khader was examined as D.W.1. On the side of the accused, Exs.D1 to D5 were marked. The learned trial Judge put all the incriminating circumstances against the accused during his examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., The accused denied the same as false. After considering the entire evidence on record, the learned trial Judge found the accused guilty of the offence, with which he was charged and sentenced him as mentioned above. Questioning the same, this appeal came to be filed.
