The Supreme Court, in a significant ruling on May 13, affirmed that a non-public servant can be convicted for abetting corruption, particularly when assisting a public servant in accumulating disproportionate assets. This landmark judgment highlights that even individuals who are not in public service can be held accountable for enabling or encouraging corrupt practices.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Issues Notice to Uttarakhand Officials Over Alleged Demolition of Registered Waqf Property
The bench, led by Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, upheld the conviction of a former public servant's wife. She had been found guilty of abetting her husband's corruption by helping him amass assets that were disproportionate to his known income, all under her name. The court referenced Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act), emphasizing that any person who aids or facilitates a public servant in committing corrupt acts is guilty of abetment.
"Any person who persuades a public servant to take bribes, decides to raise money through bribes along with a public servant, and prompts such public servant to keep the wealth with him/her or keeps the amassed wealth of a public servant in his/her own name is guilty of committing the offence of abetment of offence under section 13(1)(e) of the 1988 Act."
Read Also:- Jharkhand High Court Delivers Judgments in 4 Criminal Appeals After Supreme Court's Intervention
The appellant’s husband, a Divisional Manager at United India Insurance Co. Ltd., had been involved in demanding bribes and accumulating wealth beyond his legitimate means between 2002 and 2009. During investigations, the authorities discovered assets in the appellant’s name, leading to charges against her under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (abetment) and Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act (possession of disproportionate assets).
After the trial court and High Court upheld her conviction, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, confirming that the wife’s actions in helping her husband accumulate disproportionate assets under her name justified the conviction.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Issues Notice to Uttarakhand Officials Over Alleged Demolition of Registered Waqf Property
"In the case at hand, it is an admitted position that the appellant's husband has acquired assets (disproportionate to his income), during the check period, in appellant's name. Both the courts below have given concurrent findings on this aspect, and it is not required for us to deal with that aspect in detail."
The judgment reaffirms the law established in previous cases, such as P. Nallammal v. State (1999), where it was held that non-public servants could be convicted for abetting corruption by holding illicit assets. This case strengthens the notion that anyone involved in facilitating corruption—whether a public servant or not—should be held accountable.
The Supreme Court, in its conclusion, reiterated that even a non-public servant could be convicted under Section 109 of the IPC, in conjunction with Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act, when aiding in the accumulation of illicit wealth.
"She had allowed the co-accused to accumulate assets in her name and thus, assisted the co-accused in the accumulation of assets disproportionate to the known sources of income."
Thus, the appeal was dismissed, solidifying the position that anyone, irrespective of their public or private status, can be held criminally liable for abetting corruption.
Case Title: P. SHANTHI PUGAZHENTHI VERSUS STATE
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurabh Jain, Adv. Mr. Prayag Jain, Adv. Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR (appearance not given)
