The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) on Thursday submitted before the High Court that it has taken steps to drop the criminal case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act against former Finance Minister K.M. Mani and another person in connection with the grant of tax concession to an industrial raw material in the Budget.
The VACB made the submission when a petition filed by Benny Abraham from Kottayam, another accused in the case, challenging the FIR, came up for hearing.
In a statement, S. Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, VACB, Kottayam, said that “it was wrong on the part of the VACB to register an FIR in the matter of a legislative act.” The VACB lacked jurisdiction to conduct any investigation into the legality and propriety of a legislative act. In fact, corruption could not be attributed as the action had been done by the legislature. Permission had been sought from the higher authorities to close the case and drop all further proceedings.
Recording the submission of the VACB officer, the court observed that the VACB could not investigate into the wisdom of the legislative Assembly and probe “the vitiating elements or impropriety in a law passed by the Assembly.”
The court, while disposing of the petition, said that the Dy.SP had now realised that a very serious mistake had been committed in registering the crime. Therefore, the court said that it was not inclined to probe into the legal issues involved in the matter.
Petitioner’s contention
The petitioner contended that he was a small-scale industrialist engaged in the manufacture and supply of an industrial raw material – lead powder and its supply to battery manufacturers. With the passing of the Finance Bill by the Assembly granting tax relaxation, it had became part of the Finance Act, 2015 after receiving assent from the Governor. If such tax rebates were termed acts of corruption, then every Budget and every piece of legislation implementing budget proposals would come under suspicion. The present FIR against the petitioner and the former Finance Minister for a lawful act done by the former Minister on the floor of the legislative assembly was legally unsustainable and unjust, the petitioner argued.
