C.S. D. SWAMY vs THE STATE

The Supreme Court held that under Section 5(3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, the burden of proof shifts to the accused to satisfactorily account for wealth disproportionate to known sources of income. The Court clarified that the presumption of guilt does not create a new offense but establishes a rule of evidence, allowing conviction under Section 5(1)(d) even if specific bribery charges under Section 5(1)(a) are unproven. The appellant's conviction was upheld as he failed to provide a credible explanation for his wealth.