 dill no 47 or 19" the anti-corruption laws (amendment) bill, 1967 a billfurther to amend the antkorncption laws be it enactec;l iby parliament in the eighteenth year of the republic of india as follows:-5 1 (1) this act may be called the anti-corruption laws short title (amendment) act, 1967 and com· mcncement (2) it shall be deemed to have come into force on the 5th day of may, 1967 of 1947 • 10 2 (1) notwithstanding-amendment of anti· (a) the substitution of 'new provisions for sub-section (3) of co~ptlon section 5 of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 (hereinafter ~ili,n referred to as the 1947-act ) by section 6 (2) (c) of the anti- to oenain corruption laws (amendment) act, 1964 (hereinafter referred fr~~ to as the 19m-act); and (b) any judgment or order of any court, the said sub-section (3) as it stood immediately before the commencement of the 1964-act, shall apply and shall be deemed always to have applied to and in relation to trials of offences punishable under sub-section (2) of section 5 of the 1947-act pending before any court s immediately before such commencement as if no such new provisio'ns had been substituted for the said sub-section (3) (2) the accused person in any trial to and in relation to which sub-section (1) applies may, at the earliest opportunity available to him after the commencement of this act, demand that the trial of the 10 offence should proceed from the stage at which it was immediately before the commencement of the 19m-act and on any such demand being made the court shall proceed with the trial from that stage (3) for the removal of doubt it is hereby provided that any ('a)urt-(i) before which an appeal or application for revision against any judgment, oj'der or sentence passed or made in any trial to which sub-section (1) applies is pending immediately before the commencement of this act, or (ii) before which an appeal or application for revision 20 against any judgment, order or sentence passed or made before the commencement of this act in any such tdal, is filed after such commencement, shall remand the case for tr!al in oonformity with the provisions of this section 2s 3 of 1987 3 (1) the anti-corruption laws (amendment) ordinance, 1967 repeal an! saving j 5 hereby repealed (2) notwithstanding such repeal, anything done or any action taken under the said ordinance shall be deemed to have been done or taken under this act  statement of objects and reasonsunder sub-section (3) of section 5 ,of the preve'ntion of corruption act, 1947, as it stood immediately before the commencement of the anti-corruption laws (amendment) act, 1964, in a trial for the offence of criminal misconduct in the discharge of official duty, on proof of the fact that the accused person or any other person on his behalf was in possession, without being able to satisfactorily account for the same, of pecuniary resources or property disproportionate to his known sources of income, a presumption would arise that the accused was guilty of the offence; and if the accused failed to rebut the presumption, the court could convict him on the strength of the presumption alone by the 1964-act afore-mentioned the law on the subject was made more stringent; possession of pecuniary resources of property disproportionate to one's known sources of income was made by itself a substantive offence and certain new provisions were substituted for the said sub-section (3) no saving provision was made in the amending act in respect of cases pending immediately before the commencement of that act, as it was assumed that the presumption contained i'n the said subsoction would continue to apply to such cases by virtue of section 6 of the general clauses act, 1897 in criminal appeal 62-d of 1966, the punjab high court took a contrarv view and held that the presumption was not saved the non-availability of the presumption in respect of such pending cases might, in all probability, have resulted, in a number of such cases, in acquittal of the accused persons government, apart from becoming liable to pay compensation or arrears of salary to officers under suspension, might have been forced to allow corrupt officers to go unpunished thus, it beo:!ame urgently necessary to revive with retrospective effect the provisions , relating to the presumption contained in the said section 5 (3) in r£:spect of cases so pending the anti-corruption laws (amendmrmt) ordinance, 1967 was promulgated for this purpose at the same time, to ensure fair trial to accused persons, the ordinance provided for de novo trial of such pending cases from the stage which they reached immediately before the commencement of the amending act of 1964 2 the bill seeks to replace the ordinance by an act of parliament new delhi; the 17th may, 1967 y b chavan  ' clause 2 of the bill provides for de novo trials of the cases affected by it from the stage at which they were immediately before the commencement of the anti-corruption laws (amendment) act, 1964 where such case is at the trial stage, such de novo trial is necessary only if the accused person makes a demand in that regard in regard to cases in appeal the court before which the appeal is pending, or, as the case may be, is filed has to remand the case for such de novo trial having regard to the number of cases which may be affected by the clause, it will not be necessary to appoint any additional special judges for the trial of those cases however, in respect of such cases some additional expenditure of a non-recurring nature may be involved from the consolidated fund of india, in connection with miscellaneous matters while it is difficult to make a definite calculation of such additional expenditure (as that will depend inter aua upon the number of cases in which de novo trial is demanded), it is estimated that such expenditure will be approximately rs 10,000  a billfurther to amend the anti-corruption laws minister of horne affairs) 