STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs WASUDEO RAMCHANDRA KAIDALWAR

The Supreme Court held that under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, the burden of proof lies on the accused to satisfactorily account for assets disproportionate to known sources of income. The Court rejected the High Court's interpretation that the prosecution must exclude all possible sources of income, clarifying that once the prosecution establishes possession of such assets, the burden shifts to the accused. The conviction of the respondent was upheld, emphasizing the importance of accountability for public servants regarding their assets.