O P Chautala was convicted in a case of disproportionate assets amassed between 1993 and 2006. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on Chautala.
New Delhi: Hours after a Delhi court sentenced former Haryana Chief Minister Om Prakash Chautala to four years in jail, his son and an MLA of the Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) Abhay Chautala on Friday said he will move the High Court challenging the Delhi court order. O P Chautala was convicted in a case of disproportionate assets amassed between 1993 and 2006. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on Chautala.
A Delhi court on Friday awarded a four-year jail term to former Haryana Chief Minister O P Chautala in a case of disproportionate assets amassed between 1993 and 2006. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on Chautala.
Although Chautala’s lawyers had requested the court for a lenient sentence considering his medical condition, the CBI opposed the submissions and had pushed for maximum punishment for Chautala stating that it would send a message to society.
“The person, in this case, is a public figure and giving minimum punishment would send a wrong message. He does not have clean antecedents. It is the second case in which he has been convicted,” the CBI said.
The CBI, which was probing the case, filed the chargesheet against Chautala on March 26, 2010. The agency said that between 1993 and 2006, the seven-time MLA amassed assets worth over Rs 6.09 crore, far exceeding his known sources of income.
Last week, the court had convicted O P Chautala and had said that the accused had “failed to satisfactorily account for such dis-proportionality by proving his source of income or means by way of which, he acquired assets during this period”.
“Disproportionate assets acquired by the accused, during the check period, were to the tune of 103 per cent of the known sources of his income. The accused has failed to satisfactorily account for such disproportionality by proving his source of income or means by way of which he acquired assets during the check period,” the court said.
