The Hindu : Haribhaskar acquitted in wealth case

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Aug 06, 2002

Southern States

Southern States - Tamil Nadu

Haribhaskar acquitted in wealth case

By K.T. Sangameswaran

CHENNAI Aug. 5. A Special Court today acquitted the former Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary, N. Haribhaskar, and three others, including his wife, from the `disproportionate wealth case'.

In his 168-page order, the Special Judge-II, R. Rajamanickam, said the prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. Haribhaskar acquired assets ``disproportionate to known sources of his income'' to the tune of Rs. 72.44 lakhs in his name or in the names of his wife, Gomathiammal Ushadevi, daughter, Chitra P. Narayani, and son-in-law, Sudhir S.V. Rajan, the other three accused.

The accused had accounted for the possession of pecuniary resources and properties in their names satisfactorily. Giving the benefit of doubt to the accused, the court said they were not guilty.

The court cited the grounds to show that the calculation by the prosecution with regard to income and other receipts was not correct. It also cited various assets, which had been wrongly included by the investigating officer. At one stage, the court said that though Mr. Haribhaskar had taken the stand that a property in Cooperative Colony in Kodaikanal did not belong to him, the investigating officer was ``highly interested to fix the property with A 1.''

A prosecution charge was that Mr. Haribhaskar's wife was holding two immovable properties, which were assets disproportionate to known sources of her husband's income; but on analysis of oral and documentary evidence, the court concluded that the properties did not belong to her and she had disowned them.

In the initial stage, a case was registered only against Mr. Haribhaskar.

Later, the other three accused were implicated. But the investigating officer had not chosen to examine the three during the investigation. As regards the charge of abetment against the former IAS officer's daughter and son-in-law that they lent their names for a flat in Besant Nagar, investments in Vastra Silks and a piece of land in Kodaikanal, the judge dismissed the prosecution's contention.

The movable properties in possession of Ms. Chitra P. Narayani and her husband could not be linked to Mr. Haribhaskar.

Mr. Haribhaskar and his wife and his daughter and husband resided independently.

There was no evidence to show that Ms. Chitra P. Narayani and Mr. Sudhir S.V. Rajan were dependants of Mr. Haribhaskar. Absolutely there was no evidence that the two were abetting or aiding in the commission of any illegal act.

The case was registered by the investigating officer and he himself took up investigation. The judge quoted the defence contention that after taking up the probe, the investigating officer was promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police and he continued the probe and filed the charge sheet.

Hence, a fresh authorisation was necessary for the officer to continue the probe.

But this was not done.

The defence cited a Supreme Court decision to support its contention.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Southern States