(c) The third ground raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there was lot of variation in calculation of presumptive or probable expenditure of the petitioner by the investigating agency. As seen from the Annexures of charge-sheet, the value of assets is assessed at Rs.1,34,22,214/- which is inclusive of the assets registered in the name Kin of the petitioner and it includes both movable and immovable property, whereas the income of the petitioner herein as on the terminal date of check period was Rs.1,38,03,832/- as shown in Annexure-II. Thereby, the total expenditure was arrived at Rs.66,23,604/- for the check period and concluded that the petitioner possessed assets more than the probable savings and acquisition of such property was not explained in the reply to the notice issued to him and those aspects cannot be decided at this stage since the material on record prima facie shows that the petitioner and his family members own and possess, the assets disproportionate to the income from the known sources of the petitioner. Therefore, it is difficult at this stage to conclude that there was no prima facie material to proceed against the petitioner or the charge is groundless. In such a case, the prosecution is entitled to proceed further against the petitioner.
