A decade after a Special CBI Court convicted former Army Major General Anand Kumar Kapur in a disproportionate assets case, the Delhi High Court has acquitted him, holding that the denial of a meaningful opportunity to lead defence evidence vitiated the trial and rendered the conviction unsustainable.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh allowed Kapur’s appeals against his 2016 conviction under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988, in a case relating to allegations that he had amassed assets worth approximately Rs 2.22 crore that were disproportionate to his known sources of income during his service in the Indian Army. The Court also held that the sanction granted for his prosecution suffered from non-application of mind, rendering it legally invalid.
The High Court observed that the concept of a fair trial occupies a central position in criminal jurisprudence and forms an inseparable facet of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. It emphasised that while corruption charges against public servants are serious and must be dealt with firmly, a conviction can be sustained only after a trial that fully safeguards the accused’s right to present an effective defence.
The Court noted that the prosecution was granted nearly six months to lead its evidence, whereas the defence was effectively confined to only three hearing dates. It found that although Kapur had cited nine defence witnesses, only four could be examined before the trial court abruptly closed the defence evidence.
The High Court further observed that on the final date fixed for recording defence evidence, the trial court closed the defence after lawyers abstained from work owing to a strike. Kapur’s request for a limited adjournment was rejected solely because the Supreme Court had directed expeditious disposal of the trial.
According to the High Court, the request was not intended to indefinitely delay the proceedings but merely sought a reasonable accommodation on account of the prevailing lawyers’ strike. However, the trial court proceeded solely with the objective of complying with the timeline fixed by the Supreme Court, without examining whether the refusal to grant a further opportunity would seriously prejudice the accused.
The Court held that procedural timelines cannot override the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial under Article 21. It observed that a criminal trial cannot be reduced to a race against time where adherence to procedural deadlines eclipses the duty of courts to ensure fairness, due process and the accused’s right to a complete defence.
Apart from the procedural infirmities, the High Court independently reappreciated the entire evidence on merits and concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the charge of possession of disproportionate assets beyond reasonable doubt.
Analysing the evidence on an asset-wise basis, the Court found several errors in the approach adopted by the trial court and observed that findings of guilt in corruption prosecutions cannot be recorded in a cursory or perfunctory manner. It held that the trial court had relied on conjectures and assumptions instead of legally admissible evidence.
Rejecting the prosecution’s valuation of a basement property in Delhi, the Court held that there was no evidence establishing that Kapur had paid any consideration beyond the amount reflected in the registered sale deed.
The High Court also found that the prosecution had wrongly attributed ownership of a Goa property to Kapur merely because it stood in the name of his son. It noted that the investigating officer neither verified the source of the funds nor examined either the son or the vendor during the investigation.
Similarly, the Court held that certain investments, cash deposits and other assets had been incorrectly included while calculating Kapur’s assets despite evidence indicating that they belonged to, or had been financed by, his mother and other family members.
The High Court also observed that the sanction accorded for prosecution reflected non-application of mind and failed to satisfy the statutory requirements governing prosecution of a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It held that the defective sanction constituted an independent ground for setting aside the conviction.
Kapur had earlier been convicted by the Special CBI Court in 2016 and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment, fined Rs. 50,000, and directed to forfeit assets valued at approximately Rs. 2.22 crore.
Holding that the prosecution had failed to establish its case in accordance with law and that Kapur had been denied a fair opportunity to defend himself, the High Court set aside the conviction, sentence and confiscation order passed by the trial court, thereby acquitting him of all charges.
The post Delhi High Court overturns conviction of former Army Major General Anand Kumar Kapur in DA case appeared first on India Legal.