Supreme Court shifts burden to accused to account for disproportionate assets once prosecution proves its case

Key facts

• The Supreme Court ruled that once the prosecution establishes a public servant's assets are disproportionate to known sources of income, the burden shifts to the accused to explain the excess wealth with credible and verifiable material.
• A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva held that investigating agencies need not undertake an open-ended search for every conceivable income source an accused may later claim.
• The court dismissed the appeal of V Gopalakrishnan, a former Kerala government official convicted under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and directed him to surrender within two weeks to serve the remaining sentence.
• The prosecution alleged Gopalakrishnan accumulated disproportionate assets between January 1993 and January 2001, calculated at about 51.88% of the family's income after accounting for asset increase.
• The Kerala High Court had reduced Gopalakrishnan's sentence to one year in jail and a fine of ₹2 lakh, considering the delay in proceedings, his age and trauma.
• The court relied on its 2004 ruling in State of Madhya Pradesh v Awadh Kishore Gupta, which required the accused to satisfy the court that the explanation for wealth is worthy of acceptance, not merely plausible.