Bangalore District Court
State By Cbi/Acb vs ) Sri. Shama Shetty on 23 November, 2017
IN THE COURT OF XXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AND PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE
FOR CBI CASES, BENGALURU (CCH-4).
Spl. C.C. No.80/2013
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
PRESENT : Sri. SADASHIVA S. SULTANPURI,
B.Com., LL.B., (Spl.)
XXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and
Prl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru.
Complainant: State by CBI/ACB, Bengaluru
(By Special Public Prosecutor)
V/s
Accused: 1) Sri. Shama Shetty
S/o Sheenappa Shetty
Aged about 62 years
The then Senior Branch Manager,
Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch,
Bangalore.
(retired from service w.e.f.
30.9.2011)
Sourabh, Umashankar Saw Mill
Road, Ambagilu,
Udupi-Puttur (Po),
Udupi District,
Karnataka.
Permanent resident of
Sonagarabettu, Neelavar,
Udupi District.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
2
2) Sri. T. Rajanna,
S/o Thimmarayappa,
Aged about 52 years
Proprietor,
M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm,
Ittagalpur village,
Bangalore North Taluk.
r/o Ground Floor,
Nanjundappa Building,
Near Venugopalaswamy Temple,
Rajanukunte,
Bangalore-64
permanent resident of
Dibbur village,
Kakolu Post,
Bangalore-89.
(By Sri. Vishnumurthy,
Advocate for A1 and
Sri. M. Ravinson. Adv. for A2)
JUDGMENT
This is a charge sheet filed by the CBI/ACB, Bengaluru against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 120B r/w 420, 467 and 471 of IPC and Sec.13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that: -
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 3
(a) The Accused No.1 while working as a Senior Branch Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch, Bengaluru during the period from June 2006 to 13.2.2008 received a high value Term Loan proposal to the tune of Rs.323.70 lakhs from accused No.2 for establishing a poultry breeder farm in the name of M/s.
Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Ittagalpur village, Hesaragatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. As the accused No.1 was not vested with the sanction of financial power for the high value loan, he has recommended the proposal to Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Bengaluru in March 2007 without carrying pre- sanction formalities and without proper scrutiny of the documents etc., collected from the accused No.2 and got sanctioned the said loan on 6.8.2007. Accused No.2 who availed the Term Loan had diverted/misutilised the said funds released by the bank for the loan account. Further, the major portion of the loan amount ought to have been disbursed for construction of 20 shed, where as only four sheds were constructed fully and five sheds Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 4 were partially constructed. Out of the total equipments proposed in the project, the accused No.2 has purchased the equipments required for completing the four sheds out of 20 sheds and remaining equipments/materials were not purchased. The loan outstanding liability as on 25.5.2011 was Rs.495.42 lakhs.
(b) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that the Accused No.1 has disbursed the said loan from the term loan account No. 270010 of M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, wherein the accused No.2 was the proprietor w.e.f. 25.8.2007 and continued the disbursal of the loan amount up to 27.6.2008 to the tune of Rs.255.90 lakhs. The said amount includes the loan amount disbursed by Sri. K.J. Abraham, the then Officer (Advance), Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch without obtaining the pass orders from Accused No.1. The major portion of the loan amount was disbursed by Accused No.1 in careless and negligent manner without complying the sanction terms and conditions and causing the loss to bank. This attitude of the accused No.1 gives Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 5 suspicion that he should have hatched the criminal conspiracy with Accused No.2.
(c) Further, it is also the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 has conspired with the accused No.2 under the following circumstances.
(i) Firstly, accused No.1 has released an amount of Rs.4,43,750/- towards civil fabrication works done on the project site on the written intimation/request of the accused No.1 on 29.8.2007. Accused No.1 opened current No. CA 652 in the name of M/s. Babu Engineering Works, Davanagere (Prop: B. Dadapeer, Civil Fabrication Worker) on 29.8.2007 in violation of Know Your Customer (hereinafter referred to as KYC) norms and without obtaining any valid permission to do the civil fabrication works. Accused No.2 witnessed the said nomination made by B. Dadapeer. Thereby it goes to show that accused No.1 has conspired with the Accused No.2.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 6
(ii) Secondly, the accused No.1 opened current account No. 653 in the name of M/S Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware (Prop. R. Nagaraj) on 29.8.2007 in violation of the KYC norms and also not obtained any valid trade licence or permits or VAT registration certificate etc., or R. Nagaraj is none other than the guarantor for the term loan obtained by the accused No.2 and is nephew of accused No.2. The said M/S Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware firm said to be supplied various materials such as cement, hallow bricks, bricks, aggregated stones, stone slaps, sand, paint, polythene curtains, plastic mugs, buckets, steel plates, bolt & nuts, PVC pipes, fabricated birds cages/nests, welding rods, even oxygen gas cylinder for welding etc., to M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm without valid trade licence, the accused No.1 without verifying the cash bills/receipts memo where VAT has been charged by R. Nagaraj allowed Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 7 the same for payment. This is also another instance of accused No.1 conspired with the accused No.2.
(iii) Thirdly, the accused No.1 violated the sanction stipulation of the sanction of the said term loan to the accused No.2. As per the sanction order dated 6.8.2007, the margin money should be collected from the borrower at the rate of 35.75%. But, accused No.1 collected 25% from the account i.e., CA-650 of M/s. Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Proprietor belonging to accused No.2 in as many as 15 disbursal from 29.8.2007 to 5.10.2007.
(iv) Fourthly, the accused No.1 blindly believed the version of the accused No.2 in connection with advance payment made to the various suppliers and not taken any efforts to confirm the same from those suppliers. Merely believing the letters/ receipts produced by Accused No.2, Accused No.1 passed orders for loan disbursal and issued demand drafts/credited into their respective accounts.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 8 Further, the accused No.1 submitted compliance to the sanction terms and conditions of the term loan of the accused No.2, he released the most of the loan amount on the basis of quotations/proforma invoices. He did not obtain the cash memos or bills, payment vouchers, tax invoices or delivery challans from the suppliers/firms to whom DDs issued and even not ensured supply of the materials after release of the loan and not ascertained end use of the fund earlier released. Further, he did not maintain outward register during the relevant period and sent the DDs through accused No.2 to the suppliers/firms who supplied the materials to M/s Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
(v) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that based on the letter of the accused No.2 seeking release of loan on 28.11.2007 i.e., payment towards the purchase of chicks from M/s. Pioneer Hatcheries, Pongalur (Tamilnadu), accused No.1 passed order to release an amount of Rs.9.92,500/- from the loan Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 9 and Rs.3,57,500/- as margin i.e., total Rs.13,50,000/-. But, it is not as per the percentage fixed in the sanction order i.e., as per the sanction order, the margin amount should be 35.75%. Subsequently Rs.3,50,000/- was adjusted as it was said to be paid as advance by accused No.2. Further, a letter was seized from the residence of Accused No.2 on 24.2.2012 disclosed, the firm issued cheque for Rs.3,37,500/-.
(vi) Further, the accused No.1 sanctioned Rs.1,00,000/- including the margin @ 25% towards the land leveling cost of the project. As per the DPR it should be borne by accused No.2/ the borrower himself.
(vii) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that the accused No.1 while working in the capacity of Senior Manager of the Vijaya Bank has not caused proper calculation while making transaction and disbursement of the said loan account i.e., the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 10 accused No.1 has not properly collected the margin money at the time of disbursement of the said loan amount.
(viii) Further, it is also the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 has disbursed Rs.50,000/- on 23.12.2007 towards purchase of poultry feeds by getting the invoices only for Rs.37,500/-. There was no invoice for the remaining amount of Rs.12,500/-. Similarly, there was no invoice for release of Rs.50,000/- towards purchase of poultry medicines made on 28.12.2007 and for release of Rs.96,000/- made on 5.2.2008.
(ix) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 while disbursing the loan with margin to the suppliers, on 12.1.2008 released excess of Rs.200/- without invoice for the total amount of Rs.1,31,500/-. Invoices available only for Rs.1,31,300/-. Similarly, there were instances viz., on 18.1.2008 accused No.1 released Rs.96,000/- as Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 11 against the available invoices for only Rs.93,600/-. Accused No.1 without obtaining the pass order for loan released Rs.5,49,250/- to M/s. Preethi Constructions, Bangalore towards purchase of super automated feed mill by adjusting Rs.1,95,000/- as margin based on the suppliers letter produced by accused No.2. The accused No.1 has not complied the margin money at the time of disbursal of the said loan. Accused No.1 due to his lack of supervision has committed the above said irregularities.
(d) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that subsequent recommending of the said term loan for Rs.323.70 lakhs, two other loans were sanctioned to accused No.2 within the delegated sanction power of the accused No.1 i.e., CCM facility under the Vijaya Trade for Rs.10.00 lakhs was sanctioned on 10.11.2006 on behalf of M/s. Vigneshwara Traders, wherein the accused No.2 was the proprietor, secondly a vehicle loan of Rs.2.00 lakhs was sanctioned during the March 2007 to the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 12 accused No.2. Accused No.1 blindly believed accused No.2 and did favour in sanctioning the said two loans within a short period. Later on the said CCM account became NPA and the portion of the loan amount was repaid by the guarantor and not by the accused No.2. Still there is an outstanding liability in the said loans.
(e) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 has forwarded to the regional office the Borrowers Credit Evaluation Report on 8.3.2007, the Risk Rate Scoring Sheet on 28.3.2007. Both the reports seems to be prepared in vague and without taking any sincere efforts. Further, even though the said Borrower's Credit Evaluation Report is confidential official document, a copy of the same was seized from the possession of the accused No.2 while conducting search of residence of accused No.2 on 24.2.2012. Further, accused No.1 himself has conducted the Credit Investigation of the borrower i.e., Accused No.2 and the guarantor after enquired with the local people and furnished information in the prescribed format on Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 13 23.1.2007, confining the market value of the loan for Rs.75-80 lakhs per acre. Even though the accused No.1 was well aware of the observation made in the project's appraisal report dated 22.2.2007 and 2.3.2007 and terms and conditions stated in the appraisal report dt. 7.3.2007 and22.3.2007, none of the observations and the terms and conditions were followed or taken into account. Further, accused No.1 sent letter on 24.2.2007 seeking NDC pertaining to accused No.2 from Central Bank of India, Hesaragatta Branch and had obtained the signature of Accused No.2 on the overleaf of the letter which is confidential and proves the conspiracy of accused No.1 and 2 in cheating the bank. Copy of the said reply given by the Central Bank of India, Hesaragatta Branch was seized from the possession of Accused No.2 in his residence while conducting search on 24.2.2012.
(f) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 has not properly verified and observed the sequence of the transactions and missing particulars in Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 14 RTC, property documents collected by the accused No.2 especially for the year 2003-04. Further, the RTC extract for the year 1997 to 2002 are handwritten and 2004-05 was generated through computer are only available in record. The RTC for the year 2003-04 not held in the records. Because accused No.2 already mortgaged his agriculture land bearing Sy. No.39 & 43 at Ittagalpur village, by way of registered Simple Mortgage Deed on behalf of M/s. Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanakunte Branch on 17.6.2003.
(g) Further, after 2½ months of starting disbursal of the term loan to M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, accused No.1 forwarded the request letter of accused No.2, regarding change in system (i.e., from CAGE system to SLAT system) immediately on the same day of its receipt i.e., on 14.11.2007 to the Regional Office which itself evident that he had not properly verified the advantages in 'SLAT' system and financial implication thereon. As such accused No.1 has favoured accused No.2 in this regard.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 15
(h) Further, the accused No.1 did not conduct post- disbursement visit/inspection of the project site, except twice or thrice from the date of initial sanction of loan to the date he relieved on transfer 13.2.2008. The accused No.1 did not informed the accused No.2 and insisted for maintaining stock register or purchase register or cash receipts, tax invoice VAT certificate and verified the material purchased by the borrower viz., accused No.2. The accused No.1 did not assessed the progress work after disbursal and also not ascertain end use of the fund released in stages to A2. This has caused advantage to Accused No.2 in diverting the said loan amount which was released by the Accused No.1 for his own use and benefit.
(i) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.2 with a criminal intention to cheat the bank and diverting the loan amount colluded with accused No.1 and made his nephew R. Nagaraj as Guarantor for the loan who is also a proprietor of M/s. Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware, Dibbur. The said firm Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 16 was supplying materials such as cement, hallow bricks, aggregated stones, stone slaps, sand, paint, polythene curtains, plastic mugs, buckets, steel plates, bolt & nuts, PVC Pipes, fabricated birds cages/nests, welding rods and even oxygen gas cylinder for welding etc., to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Ittagalpur. Further, it is the case of the prosecution that on opening the current account of the said M/s. Lakshmi Ranganatha Cements and Hardware the accused No.1 did not insisted or obtained valid trade license or permit with KST/CST numbers, VAT registration certificate or any dealership for supply of those materials and violated the KYC norms. Further, many documents showing the purchase of the materials from the dealers or main suppliers viz., cash bills/ receipts for the purchase, tax invoice, delivery challan, stock register, cash book were not produced by the suppliers for investigation. The amount of Rs.1,11,44,614/- was credited to the current account of M/s Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware, the firm i.e., CA-653 for the material supplied to Sri. Sai Poultry Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 17 Breeding Farm. The bank officials did not observe the above aspects and kept on releasing the loan disbursed to the said firm of accused No.2.
(j) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.2 used to write the letters seeking bill payment from Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm in the name of M/S Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware through his wife, Smt. Sarvamangala N.R. and most of the cash bills/receipts of the firm were also written by her but got signed by R. Nagaraj, the nephew of Accused No.2. Further, during the search operation conducted on 24.2.2012, two of cash books pertaining to the firm were sized from the residence of Accused No.2. A rubber stamp of firm was also seized during the search operation from the possession of Accused No.2. Apart from the above, copies of EC Forms, LSR etc., pertaining to the property of R. Nagaraj were seized from the possession of the accused No.2. The LSR was addressed to the Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch, Bangalore.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 18
(k) Further, it is the case of the prosecution that accused No.2 with criminal intention to cheat the bank and diverting the loan amount, colluded with accused No.1 got released the loan amount to the tune of Rs.29.74,000/- towards the purchase of feed items viz., maize, soya, de-oiled rice brown from M/s. Vinayaka Enterprises, Arishinakunte, Nelamangala, Bangalore, a partnership firm wherein accused No.2, and his wife Sarvamangala and A.H. Nagaraj, the uncle of accused No.2 were the partners, the shop was established during June or July, 2006 and closed within 5-6 months i.e., by the end of 2006. But the accused No.2 got supplied the material from the said shop from February to April 2008 and claimed Rs.29,74,000/- on 3 different occasions by producing proforma invoices even though the material supplied were in huge quantity, the bank officials, including accused No.2, did not insist for regular purchase bills, tax invoices and delivery challan to ensure the lawful purchase and also not confirmed the payment of advance said to be paid by accused No.2 and Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 19 they also did not verify the stock by conducting post- disbursal inspection report or ensured end use of the fund.
(l) Further, rubber stamps of the firm seized from the house of accused No.2 on 24.2.2012 and the documents collected from M/s. Canara Bank, Nelamangala Branch proves that A2's wife Sarvamangala and A.H. Nagaraj, uncle of the accused No.2 were the partner of firm. Whereas the firm did not exist at the given address during the period of disbursal.
(m) Further, accused No.2 with criminal intention to cheat the bank, misappropriated the public money and diverted the same for his own use, he managed the suppliers from whom he got purchased materials for construction of the project site of M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. In this regard he has taken undue advantage from M/s. Aryan Pipes Pvt., Ltd., and M/s. Aryan Steels Co., M/s. Vijeet Steels, Bengaluru, M/s. Vinayaka & Co., Yelahank, Bengaluru, M/s. Ramco Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 20 Industries Ltd., Bangaluru, M/s. Pioneer Hatcheries, Pongalur, Tamilnadu, M/s. Kanaga Poultry Services, Bengaluru, M/s. Preethi Constructions, Bengaluru. Further, accused No.2 even though was enjoying the cash credit facilities as Proprietor, M/s. Vinayaka Enterprises, Rajankunte and availed the term loan of huge value of Rs.323.70 lakhs as Proprietor, M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, from Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka, Bengaluru, he without intimating the bank, opened account No. 04115000655 with ICICI Bank, Yelahanka Branch in the name of Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Ittagalpur on 25.8.2008 and made/received credits for about Rs.2,32,51,761/- by way of transfer of RTGS in 81 occasions from 11.10.2008 to 26.8.2010, the accused No.2 subsequently debited money from the said account by way of cheques and the paid debit cheques collected from the bank is evident to prove the withdrawals made by him personally duly signed thereon. The accused No.2 neither repaid the loan amount taken from Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch nor completed the project i.e., Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 21 M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, even after receipt of Rs.2,31,51,761/-. Further, it is also the case of the prosecution that accused No.2 and his wife Sarvamangala opened current A/c. on 4.12.2008 with M/s. Bank of India, Visveshwarapuram Branch, Bangalore as proprietor of M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and M/s. Sri Sai Tej Poultry Enterprises respectively and they availed two working capital facility, each to the tune of Rs.30.00 lakhs in their name. The said loans were sanctioned by the Bank of India on 4.12.2008 and disbursed maximum of the loan amount on the same day. While availing the aforesaid loans accused No.2 and his wife Sarvamangala have produced partition deed dated 5/8.12.2006 to the bank while availing the said loans, seems to be created or fake. The EMDTD said to be registered with Sub Register Office (SRO), Head Quarter, Yelahanka on 3.12.2008 vide document No.936/08-09 also fake/created. Even though the original property documents were already mortgaged with the M/s. Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch, Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 22 Bengaluru, accused No.2 has once again mortgaged the said property with the Bank of India with the criminal intention and forged the valuable security, using forged document making them as genuine in availing the said loans, thereby accused No.1 and accused No.2 with criminal intention have conspired, cheated and made forgery of valuable security utilizing forged documents and criminal misconduct by the public servant with the criminal intention to cheat the bank and thereby the above act of the accused No.1 and 2 caused a wrongful loss to Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch, Bengaluru to the tune of Rs.495.42 lakhs as on 25.5.2011 and corresponding gain to accused No.2.
Hence, it is alleged that accused No.1 and 2 have committed offences punishable u/s 120B r/w sec. 420, 467, 471 IPC and Sec. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
(n) In this regard Sri. R. Srinivasan, Investigating Officer of Vijaya Bank has filed detailed report as per Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 23 Ex.P2. Basing on the said report, the Chief Vigilance Officer, concurrent charge Sri. T.S. Jayanth, has filed complaint as per Ex.P1 to the Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru to conduct detailed enquiry about the commission of the offences alleged in the complaint. Basing on the said complaint, the Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru have obtained search warrant from this court and made search of the premises of the accused No.1 and 2 and have recovered some incriminating evidence.
(o) Thereafter the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of the witnesses CW-1 to 70 and collected the documents D.1 to 240 and completion of the investigation, as the accused No.1 retired at the time of filing the charge sheet, he did not wait for getting the sanction against the accused No.1 and filed charge sheet on 15-3- 2013 against accused No.1 and 2 for the above said offence.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 24 My predecessor in office has taken cognizance against Accused No.1 and 2 for the above said offences. As accused No.1 being a public servant, Senior Manager of the Vijaya Bank has retired on 3.9.2011 as such no necessity arises for getting sanction order against the accused No.1. After taking cognizance, this court has issued summons to accused No.1 and 2.
3. Accused No.1 and 2 appeared before this court on 25.5.2013 and were enlarged on bail as per the order of this court. On hearing both sides, the charges were framed against the Accused 1 & 2 for the offences punishable u/s 120B r/w sec. 420, 467, 471 IPC and Sec. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and explained the contents of the charge to each of them in the language known to them and they have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. In view of the same, the learned Public Prosecutor has on behalf of the prosecution examined witnesses as PWs.1 to 64 and got marked documents Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.483, Material objects at M.Os.1 to 21. The Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 25 documents at Ex.D1 to D5 were marked by the learned advocates for accused No.1 and 2 during the course of cross examination of the witnesses. The statements of Accused No.1 and 2 as required U/s 313 Cr.P.C., were recorded. The accused did not lead any defence evidence.
5. I have heard the detailed arguments advanced by learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI and learned counsel for Accused No.1 and 2.
6. In view of the above controversies, the points that would arise for my consideration are:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Accused No. 1, while working as Branch Manager of M/s.
Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bangalore, during the period from June 2006 to 13.2.2008 entered into criminal conspiracy with the accused No.2 in order to cheat M/s. Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch, Bengaluru and in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy...
Accused N o.1 received a high value term loan proposal to the tune of Rs.323.70 lakhs brought by accused No.2 Proprietor, M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Ittagalpur village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, recommended the proposal to Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Bengaluru in March Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 26 2007 without carrying out pre-sanction formalities and without proper scrutiny of the documents etc., collected from the accused No.2.
Further the loan was sanctioned to Accused no.2 on 6.8.2007, accused No.2 diverted/misused the funds released by the bank from the loan account and though the major portion of the loan amount was disbursed for the construction of 20 sheds, only 4 shed were constructed fully and 5 sheds were partially constructed and those sheds were also abandoned and out of the total equipments/ materials proposed in the project, purchases were made to the extent required for completing the 4 shed out of 20 shed and the remaining equipments/ materials were not purchased .
Further the property given by the Accused no.2 as security to the loan was already mortgaged to M/s. Bank of India, Vishweshwarapuram Branch and M/s. Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch and thereby cheated M/s. Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch and thereby accused no.1& 2 have committed offence of criminal conspiracy punishable U/sec. 120(B) of IPC?
2) Further whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that in furtherance of said criminal conspiracy, the Accused No. 1 has not properly verified the property documents submitted by accused No.2, he failed to initiate action to obtain second legal opinion through another penal advocate and also not verified the details of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 27 investments made by accused No.2 with M/s. Sri Ram Chits (Karnataka) Pvt. Ltd., Yalahanka to the extent of 160 lakhs Further accused No.1 holding the post of Senior Manager during the relevant period failed to comply the sanction terms and conditions and disbursed 255.90 lakhs from 25.8.2007 to 13.2.2008 from the term loan account No. 270010 by disbursing the loan amount on the face of quotation/ proforma invoices submitted by accused No.2 without obtaining the cash bill/memo, tax invoice or purchase bills either from the suppliers or through accused No.2.
Accused No.1 also did not conducted the post disbursement visit/ inspection of the project regularly and never insisted accused No.2 for maintaining stock register or purchase register or cash receipts, tax invoice, VAT certificate and verified the material purchased by accused No.2. Further, accused No.1 furnished the borrower's credit evaluation report on 8.3.2007, the risk rate scoring sheet on 28.3.2007, though the borrower's credit evaluation report is a confidential official document, the copy of the same was seized from the possession of accused No.2 while conducting search of his residence Further accused No.1 himself furnished the credit investigation of the borrower and the guarantor in the prescribed format and also conducted inspection of land property dated 23.1.2007 and confirmed the market value of the land at Rs.75.80 lakhs per acres.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 28 Further accused No.1 debited the margin at the rate of 25% from 26.8.2006 to 5.11.2006 against the prescribed margin amount of 35.75% and did not recover the difference amount from accused No.2 Further at the instance of accused No.2, accused No.1 opened the current account No.652 of M/s. Babu Engineering Works, Davanagere and the current account No.653 of M/s Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement and Hardware, Dibbur, by violating the KYC norms, without valid trade license and VAT registration certificates etc. Further in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy accused No.1 got released the loan amount on the pretext that accused No.2 has purchased materials from M/s. Sri Lakshmi Ranganath Cement and Hardware owned by Sri. R. Nagaraj, the guarantor (nephew of accused No.2) an amount of Rs.1,11,44,614/- (Rs.73,49,985/- as loan and Rs.37,94,629/- as margin) was released in favour of M/s. Lakshmi Ranganath Cement and Hardware by crediting the same to the current account No.653 and actually the same to the current account No.653 and actually there was no transactions in the above said current account except in respect of the above said amount credited out of the loan proceeds and R. Nagaraj was not at all doing any business in cement and hardware and he had no license for doing the said business. Further Accused No.2 use to write the letters seeking bill payment from the loan account in the name of M/s. Sri Lakshmi Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 29 Ranganatha Cement and Hardware through his wife Smt. Sarvamangala N.R. and most of the cash bills/receipts of the firm were also written by her but got signed by R. Nagaraj, the guarantor.
Accused No.2 in connivance with accused No.1 got released the loan amount to the tune of Rs.29,74,000/- towards the purchase of poultry feed items from M/s. Vinayaka Enterprises, Arisinakunte, Nelamangala, a partnership of accused No.2, his wife Smt. Sarvamangala and Sri. A.H. Nagaraj-the uncle of accused No.2 and as per A.H. Nagaraj the shop was established during June or July 2006 and closed within 5 to 6 months namely by the end of 2006 and the Bank officials have not ensured the purchase of poultry feed items by the borrower M/s Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm from Ms. Sri Vinayaka Enterprises stated above.
Further, accused No.1 caused advantage to accused No.2 in diverting the loan amount for the own use and benefit of accused No.2 in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy Accused No.2 collected cheques from the suppliers company viz., a) Aryan Pipes and Steel Co., b) Vijeeth Steels, c) Vinayaka and Co., d) Ramco Industries Ltd., e) Pioneer Hatcheries, f) Kanaga Poultry Services, g) Preethi Constructions etc., duplicate vouchers/invoices seized from the residence of accused No.2 discloses the criminal intention of accused No.2 Further accused No.1 violated the sanction stipulation by merely believing the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 30 letters/receipts produced by accused No.2 and disbursed the loan on the basis of quotation/ proforma invoices and issued demand drafts/ credited to the suppliers and he did not obtain the cash memo/bills, payment vouchers, tax invoices or delivery challans from the suppliers.
Further Accused No.1 did not conducted post disbursement visit/inspection of the project site except twice or thrice from the date of initial sanction till the date of his transfer and he has not got ascertained the end use of the funds released.
Further accused No.2 had received huge amount by way of cheques from the suppliers stated above and deposited same into the account of accused No.2 maintained by accused No.2 with other Banks viz., account No. 04115000655 with M/s ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch in the name of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, Ittagalapur on 25.8.2008 and received credit of about Rs.2,31,51,761/- by way of transfer and RTGS on 81 occasions from 11.10.2008 to 26.8.2010 and accused No.2 has withdrawn the said amount by issuing cheques.
Further, accused No.2 with criminal intention to cheat M/s. Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bangalore, suppressed the fact that he had executed a registered simple mortgage deed on 17.6.2003 on Sub- Registrar office, Yalahanka vide document No. 3448/2003-04 in favour of M/s Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch in respect of 4 acres 19 guntas of land in Sy. No. 39 and 4 acres 39 guntas of land in Sy. No.43 and afterwards accused Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 31 No.2 sold about 2 acres of land in Sy. No.43 on 26.8.2005, exchanged 1 acre 30 guntas on 1.9.2005 and got registered a Partition Deed dated 5/8.12.2006 and mortgaged the same land to M/s. Vijaya Bank for availing the term loan and thereby induced the said bank to grant loan.
Further, accused No.2 who availed the term loan has diverted/misutilised the funds released by the Bank and though the major portion of the loan amount was disbursed for the construction of 20 shed only 4 sheds were constructed fully, 5 sheds were partially constructed and subsequently all the sheds are abandoned Further accused No.2 had already mortgaged the property given as security to M/s Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bangalore in favour of M/s Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch and M/s Bank of India, Vishveswarapuram Branch and thereby the Vijaya Bank has lost the charge over the property given as security.
Thereby accused No.1 and 2 in pursuance of their criminal conspiracy fraudulently, dishonestly and with malfide intention have cheated Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bangalore.
Thereby accused No.1 and 2 have committed an offence punishable U/Sec. 420 of IPC r/w Sec.120 (B) of IPC?
3) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that in furtherance of criminal conspiracy, Accused No.2 and his wife Smt. Sarvamangala, N.R., Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 32 availed working capital loans from M/s. Bank of India, Vishweshwarapuram Branch, Bangalore as Proprietor for Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and Sri Sai Teja Poultry Enterprises respectively, each to the tune of Rs. 30 lakhs on 14.12.2008 and accused No.2 and his wife Smt. Sarvamangala N.R. (on behalf of their minor children) executed equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds pertaining to agricultural land at Sy. No. 39 and 43 of Ittagalapur on 3.12.2008 and registered the same with Sub-Registrar Office, Yalahanka and the partition deed dated 5/8.12.2006 submitted by accused No.2 while availing the said loans is a fake one and the registration of the equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds in Sub- Registrar Office, Yalahanka is also fake as the jurisdiction over the property comes to Sub-Registrar office, Hesaraghatta and not to Sub-Registrar Office, Yelahanka and the above said mortgage deed has been executed by accused No.2 and his wife even though the original property documents were already mortgaged with M/s Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch.
Thereby accused No.2 has created false documents and thereby the accused No.1 and 2 have committed an offence punishable u/s 467 IPC r/w Sec.120(B) of IPC?
4) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that in furtherance of criminal conspiracy Accused No.1 and 2 with an intention to cheat M/s. Bank of India, Vishweshwarapuram, Bangalore, dishonestly and fraudulently Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 33 used the false documents as genuine documents knowing that the documents are not genuine and cheated the said bank by availing loan and thereby accused No.1 and 2 have committed the offence punishable u/s 471 of IPC r/w Sec.120(B) of IPC?
5) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, Accused No.1 being a public servant while working as Senior Branch Manager, M/s. Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bangalore, during the period from June 2006 to 13.2.2008 fraudulently and dishonestly recommended the term loan proposal of accused No.2 Proprietor, M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm to the tune of Rs.327.70 lakhs in March 2007.
Subsequently accused No.1 sanctioned cash credit miscellaneous loan of Rs.10 lakhs and a vehicle loan for Rs.2 lakhs to accused No.2 during November 2006 and March 2007.
Further accused No.1 furnished the "borrows credit evaluation report" dated 8.3.2007, the risk rate scoring sheet dated 28.3.2007 and also conducted the credit investigation of accused No.2 and the guarantor as well as the inspection of landed property dated 23.1.2007 confirming the market value at Rs.75.80 lakhs per acre. Further Accused no.1 got released the term loan amount granted to M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm to the suppliers of the borrower without insisting for cash memo/bills, payment vouchers, tax invoices or delivery challans from the suppliers.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 34 Further Accused no.1 did not conduct post disbursement visit/inspection of properly from time to time and thereby did not took the second legal opinion regarding the property offered as security for the loan and abusing his official position obtained for himself or for any other person's pecuniary advantage and thereby committed a criminal misconduct punishable u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988?
6) What Order?
7. My findings on the above points are as follows:
POINT No.1: In the Negative, POINT No.2: In the Partly Affirmative, POINT No.3:
As against accused No.1: In the negative, As against accused. No.2: No opinion is given, POINT No.4:
As against accused No.1: In the negative, As against accused No.2; No opinion is given, POINT No.5: In the Negative, POINT No.6: As per final order, for the following REASONS
8. POINT No.1 to 5: - For the sake of convenience and in order to avoid repetition of facts, I Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 35 would like to discuss Points 1 to 5 together for consideration.
9. It is undisputed fact that accused No.1 Shama Shetty has served as Senior Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru from June 2006 to 13.2.2008. It is also undisputed fact that during the said period the accused No.2 being the Proprietor of Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm has applied to the Vijaya Bank for a term loan of Rs.323.70 lakhs and the said loan application was processed by the accused No.1.
10. Further Accused no.1 on collecting the necessary documents from Accused no.2 has submitted the same to the Regional Office of Vijaya Bank along with recommendation for sanction. The said loan was sanctioned by Regional office Vijaya Bank on 15-11-2007 as per sanction letter at Ex.P.12. Thereafter the said loan was modified as per modification of sanction terms & conditions dated 22-11-2007 at Ex.P.14. Further, it is the specific case of the prosecution that accused No.1 being the Senior Branch Manager and being public Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 36 servant has conspired with the accused No.2 in sanction of the said loan. Further it is also the allegation of the prosecution that accused No.1 has not complied the requisite procedures and has not collected the necessary documents and shown his negligence for proposing the sanction of the said loan. Further, it is also the allegation of the prosecution that accused No.1 has conspired with accused No.2 and allowed the accused No.2 to misuse or deviate the said funds other than the purpose for which the said loan was sanctioned. Further, it is also the case of the prosecution that due to conspiracy of the accused No.1 and 2 they have caused financial loss to the Vijaya Bank and in turn the accused No.2 has benefited by the same.
11. In this regard, before discussing the evidence and documents on merits, I would like to reproduce Sec. 120-A & B. of I.P.C.
120A. Definition of criminal conspiracy: -
When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done: -
(1) an illegal act, or Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 37 (2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy;
provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.
120B. Punishment of criminal conspiracy: -
(1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence.
(3) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both.
Further, I would like to reproduce Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevantion of Curreption Act which reads as under: -
13. Criminal misconduct by a public servant: - (1) A public servant is said to commit the offence of criminal misconduct: -
(a) if he habitually accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain from any person for himself or for any other person any gratification other than legal Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 38 remuneration as a motive or reward such as is mentioned in section 7; or
(b) ...
(c) ....
(d) If he: -
(i) by corrupt or illegal means, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage; or
(ii) by abusing his position as a public servant, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage; or
(iii) while holding office as a public servant, obtains for any person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage without any public interest; or (2) Any public servant who commits criminal misconduct shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than [four years] but which may extend to [ten years] and shall also be liable to fine.
12. As per the finding in the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in Criminal Law Journal 2003 page 4801 in Ram Narain Poply vs. CBI, it is held that:
(A) Penal Code 145 of 1860), S. 120-B -
Criminal conspiracy - Ingredient of offence - Is an agreement between conspiration to do an illegal act - No overt act need be done in furtherance of conspiracy - Conspiracies are not hatched in open but are security planned -
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 39 Direct evidence rarely available to prove conspiracy - Circumstantial evidence can be relied on - Conspiracy is continuing offence and subsists till it is executed.
Further same principle has been up held in the Judgment of (2013) Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 891 (2013) 2 Supreme Court Cases 162 in N.V. Subba Rao vs. State, through Inspector of Police, CBI/SPE, Vishakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh wherein their Lordships have held:
F. Penal Code, 1860 - S. 120-B -
Criminal conspiracy - Proof - Essentials - Meeting of minds of two or more persons for doing or causing to be done an illegal act or an act by illegal means, reiterated is essential - Further held, conspiracy is hatched in secrecy and for proving same substantial direct- evidence may not be available - Hence, criminal conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence.
13. Therefore, in view of the above provision of law in order to prove the conspiracy, the prosecution has to prove there is an illegal meeting of two minds so as to cause conspiracy to commit an offence punishable under law. In the present case on hand, it the specific allegation of the prosecution that the accused No.1 has Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 40 not properly followed the requisite procedures for proposing of this loan in favour of the accused No.2. In this regard, admittedly there is no direct evidence to the effect that accused 1&2 have met each other directly and conspired to cheat the bank, under the circumstances as per decisions referred above the court has to consider circumstantial evidence of the case.
14. Keeping in mind above principles of law, I would like to discuss further that the evidence of witness in respect of the procedure to be adopted for proposing and sanction of the loan. PW.2 the Deputy General Manager of Vijaya Bank has deposed that during 2010 December to May 2011 he was working as Assistant General Manager in Chairman Secretariat, Head Office, Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru at that time he was working as a Secretary to the CMD (Chairman & Managing Director). From 2011 he become the Deputy General Manager of the Vijaya Bank that Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch was controlled by the Regional Office, Bengaluru, he knows priority sector of lending loan in respect of the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 41 Vijaya Bank. Further, he deposed during the cross- examination at para-3 that "I am not aware about the financial limit of the Senior Branch Manager regarding sanction of the loan. When the loan sought is beyond the financial limits of the Senior Branch Manager, he will send the loan proposal along with his recommendation to the Regional Office who is competent to sanction the loan. It is the procedure that has to be followed by the branch. After the loan proposal is given to the branch, it will be processed by the concerned loan officer and the Branch Head will go through the same and he will put his recommendation and sent to the Regional Office for sanction. The loan application along with entire documents submitted by the borrower and also the loan proposal and the recommendation of the branch head will be send to the Regional office from the branch. After going through the above said documents carefully, the Regional Office may sanction the loan or raise queries to the Branch office to be answered. After compliance of the queries raised by the Regional Office, the Regional office will sanction the loan (where Regional office has got the power to sanction the loan)". Further, he has deposed in para-4 of his cross- examination that:
In this case also the Regional Office raised some queries in respect of the loan sought by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and the branch office has replied those queries and afterwards Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 42 the loan has been sanctioned by the Regional Office.
Further he has deposed at para-5 of the cross-
examination that:
The Regional Office only if it is satisfied that the loan proposal sent by it and also after taking into consideration given to the queries raised by the Regional Office, the Regional Office will sanction the loan, otherwise it may be reject the loan proposal.
Further, in para-6 of the cross-examination he has deposed that:
The loan sanctioned by the Regional Office to Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm is according to the norms and banking procedures.
Further, admittedly the accused No.2 has submitted his loan application as per Ex.P3 on 16.10.2006. The accused No.1 after collecting all the necessary documents along with the 1) Pre-inspection Report dated 8-9-2006,
2) Project Report of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm prepared by Echo Biotech Agri-Clinic as per Ex.P.6 dated 6.10.2006, 3) Appraisers Report of Agriculture Officer attached to Vijaya Bank at Ex.P7, 4) Project report dated 6-10-2006 at Ex.P.6 and 5) quotations has sent the said Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 43 loan application to the Regional Office along with the recommendation for sanction. It is also undisputed fact that the Regional Office after verifying the said documents has raised some queries and sent back the said application for answering the said queries.
Thereafter, the accused No.1 after getting the proper replies from the accused No.2 to the said queries again he has resubmitted the said application along with answered queries to the Regional Office. The Regional Office after satisfying the loan, the documents submitted by the borrower and queries submitted by the Branch Office has sanctioned the said loan. Therefore, it goes to show that accused No.1 has followed all requisite procedures for getting the sanction of the said loan on 20.7.2007 as per sanction letter dated 15.11.2007. Thereafter, as per the progress report, the loan was modified as per the modification of sanction and terms and conditions of loan dated 22.11.2007 as per Ex.P.14.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 44
15. In this regard, further, I would like to discuss the evidence of PW.3 the Assistant General Manager of Vijaya Bank, the Regional Office, Bengaluru North has deposed that:
"There are specified guidelines in respect of any credit to be entertained by the bank. Likewise there are guidelines regarding sanction of loan for poultry farming. The poultry farming comes indirectly to agricultural sector. As per lending guidelines even for poultry farming, the Branch Manager is required to make proper assessment and enquiry about the prospective borrower, project and also about the securities offered and he has to make even market enquiries. When the loan application is given, the Branch Manager has to assess whether the loan sought coming under his delegated power or next authority. If the loan proposal does not come under his delegated power, he has to submit the proposal with all other related papers to the next sanctioning authority (Regional Office). Before submitting the loan application to the Regional Office, Branch Manager has to make proper evaluation of the borrower, project and obtain all the related paper and forward to the Regional office. In the case there is a security of immovable property, the Branch Manager has to arrange for obtaining legal opinion, valuation report and also himself has to conduct the inspection of the property and submit the report to the Regional Office. Since poultry is indirect agricultural loan, the Branch Manager should also arrange for agricultural officer appraisal report. If the Regional Office raises any queries regarding the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 45 proposal sent to it, the Branch Manager has to reply to the queries.
Therefore, ongoing through the evidence of the PW.3, it also goes to show that the poultry farming comes under the agricultural sector. Therefore, it is the responsibility of an Agricultural Officer of the bank to give his opinion supported by the opinion and recommendation of the Branch Manager.
16. Further, as per the evidence of PW.4 P. Jayanth Shetty, the Chief Manager as well as Assistant General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Bengaluru has deposed that before sanction of the loan, there should be pre-sanction inspection. In this regard, admittedly on 8.9.2006, the PW.10, the senior General Manager ,Regional office Vijaya Bank alongwith Pw-15, S.S. Sreedhar, the Agricultural Officer of the Chikkaballapur Vijaya Bank Branch, and the accused No.1 have visited the said spot belonged to the accused No.2 at Rajanukunte village. They have submitted their report as per Ex.P. 39. Thereby it goes to show that Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 46 before submitting of the said loan application itself the said spot of the poultry farm was inspected by the Accused No.1 along with Agricultural Officer and PW.15. Further, they also expressed favourable report to that effect. Further, PW.15 S.S. Sridhar, Agricultural Officer at Chikkaballapur branch has specifically deposed in his examination-in-chief at page No.3 of para-5 that he was instructed by the Regional Office/Controlling office, Bangalore in the first week of September 2006 to process the loan application of Accused No.2. The loan application had been given to Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch and there was no Agricultural Officer in Yelahanka Branch and he was the nearest Agricultural Officer working in Chikkaballapura Branch and hence he has been instructed by the Regional Office to process the loan application of Accused No.2. Further, he has also deposed that as per the project report, existing civil structure i.e., two godowns, borewell, laying of roads, leveling of land, cleaning of land and drilling of another borewell were to be treated as margin money worth Rs.40 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 47 lakhs. Further, he has deposed that on 22.2.2007 he has addressed letter to Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch with a copy marked to Regional Office and brought to the notice of the differences observed by him and requested Branch to not to treat the existing structures as margin money since it was 10 years earlier and requested the Branch to obtain fresh project report excluding the existing structures.
17. Further, he has also deposed that after getting the corrections and clarifications as he was getting pressure from the Regional Office, Bengaluru to dispose of the loan application of Accused No.2 at the earliest since the year ending i.e., March 2007 is fast approaching, he has stated in the covering letter dated 2.3.2007 and highlighted the kind attention of B.V. Nagaraju, who was also looking after the Agricultural Finance Section in the Regional Office. It goes to show that the accused No.1 he himself alone has not processed the said application, he has taken the help and assistance and the work of the PW.15, the then Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 48 Agricultural Officer, Chikkaballapura Branch, to process the loan application belong to the accused No.2. That the said loan application for financing the poultry farm is considered as agricultural loan. Further, PW.15 has deposed about the guidelines and duties of the accused No.1 in respect of the sanction of the said loan. As per the Ex.P30, the Monitoring Report Ex. P34, 36 the circulars, it goes to show that the accused No.1 has complied the said circulars.
18. It is admitted fact that as per Ex.P3, the loan application for agricultural loan submitted by the accused No.2, the said Ex.P.3 loan application consisting of credit investigation report which is to be prepared by the Branch Manager. Ex.P.3 consists of report of independent inspection of landed property by the Manager, statement of assets and liabilities of borrower and guarantor. Ex.P.4 is the evaluation sheet prepared independently by the Branch Manager. Ex.P.5 is the quotation of M/s. DPK Engineers Pvt. Ltd., for 62.5 Kilo Watt Generator Set. Ex.P.5 also consists of quotations Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 49 from Hazarath Poultry Equipments for supply of broiler parent chick material with annexures. Ex.P.5 also contains quotation from M/s. Suran Air Condition & Refrigerator Services for supply of Cold storage with accessories, quotation from M/S Prithvi Construction for supply of super automatic feeding manufacturing unit and other related accessories, proforma invoice from M/s. Aravind Motors Pvt., Ltd., for supply of data LPT 47/34 cabin with slip Hideck of the said application also accompanied by Ex.P.6 the project report. Ex.P.7 detailed appraisal report of Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Ex.P.8 is the letter of the Branch dated 23.2.2007 of Regional Office, Bengaluru addressed to Branch Manager, Yalahanka branch pointing out certain deficiency in the proposal and calling for the remarks from the branch. Ex.P.8 is the Letter of Branch dated 28.3.2007 addressed to Regional Office, Bengaluru furnishing for proposal relating annexures. Ex.P.9 is the Branch Letter dated 5.7.2007 addressed to Regional Office furnishing details of extension of liability of party.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 50 Ex.P.10 is the letter by branch head dt. 6.7.2007 furnishing details of security insufficiently credit limit of the party. Ex.P.11 is the Branch Letter dated 2.8.2007 addressed to the Regional Office, Bengaluru on the case of product. Ex.P.12 is the detail of memorandum for Assistant General Manager i.e., the sanctioning authority, in Ex.P.12 the sanctioning authority has made following observations. Approved and accorded as recommended by the Regional Committee and terms and conditions in the said memorandum. Further, the Regional officer has also considered the marginal amount security furnished by the accused No.2 in respect of Sriram Chits Karnataka Pvt., Ltd., as per the document at D-20, it goes to show that the accused No.2 having chits of total value of Rs.245 lakhs in his name, relatives and friends name and he himself being nominee. He has already deposited Rs.160 lakhs in the groups of chits. This corroborates with the evidence of PW.2 in his examination in chief at page No.4 para-9 that:
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 51 "The Branch has submitted the letter dated 13.3.2007 of Sriram Chits Karnataka Pvt. Ltd., addressed to the 1st accused to the Regional office and that letter is part of Ex.P.8. While sanctioning the loan, the Regional office will look into the source of margin amount to be brought in by the borrower. The above said letter of Sriram Chits Karnataka Pvt. Ltd., was one of the source of margin security given by the borrower. From the document shown to me I do not find any objection taken by the Regional office to the above said source of margin security given by the borrower."
Thereby, the said loan application is said to be supported by the margin security submitted by the accused No.2.
19. As per Ex.P.13, the proceeding of the Regional Credit Committee. Ex.P.13 also consists of details of the terms and conditions along with separate letter by sanctioning authority by dated 16/7/2006 addressed to Senior Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch to assertion to end use of the funds by conducting inspection of the form at least once in a quarter along with Agricultural Officer. Therefore, considering the recommendation of the Credit Committee and the terms and conditions of the sanction of the said loan, it is one Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 52 of the duty of the accused No.1 to inspect the spot at least once in a quarter. In this regard, admittedly accused No.1 has inspected the spot i.e., Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Unit on 16.11.2007 as per Ex.P39(e) and on 29.6.2007 at Ex.P39(d). Admittedly the accused No.1 was transferred from the said branch on 13.2.2008. In other words before he got transferred the accused No.1 has inspected the said project for complying the terms and conditions of the sanction order of the said loan.
Further, the subsequent Senior Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch who has succeeded the accused No.1 is PW.17 Seetharam Shetty who worked as a Senior Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch from February 2008 to March 2009. Thereafter, PW.14 Shankare Gowda Patil who worked as Senior Manager of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch who succeeded PW.17 worked for the period 10.5.2009 to 25.2.2011 have not at all raised any objection with regard to the any of the illegality or irregularities of the sanction,& compliance of sanction order of the said loan. Admittedly, the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 53 Seetharama Shetty PW.17 who has succeeded accused No.1 has released part of the loan to the accused No.2. Thereby it also fortifies the fact that the said loan in favour of accused No.2 was sanctioned and the amount was disbursed in accordance with norms and procedure of the bank.
20. PW.22 Ramesh Kumar K., Panel Advocate of the Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru has deposed that the accused No.1 who was working as a Chief Manager, Vijaya Bank has requested him to give legal opinion regarding the property mentioned in the letter belonging to Sri. Sai Poultry Farm. In this regard, PW.22 has deposed that he has given a report regarding the same as per Ex.P37. He has been informed to give opinion regarding the market title in respect of the land at Sy. No.39 and 43 of Itagalpura of Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North. Accordingly after verifying the documents, he also went to the Sub-Registrar Office, Yalahanka and Central Records, Sheshadripuram and obtained the Encumbrance Certificate regarding the said Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 54 property for the period of last 13 years i.e., from 1965 to 2007. Further, even as per Ex.P37, the PW.22 the Panel Advocate has opined that "Thus all the above said documents establish that T. Rajanna, R. Pavan, R. Ullas are holding 34% undivided share each of them in Sy. No.39 and 43 in respect of the said C schedule property shown in the partition deed dated 5.12.2006".
Further, he has also deposed that in the Encumbrance Certificate sent to him along with said letter for the period 1.4.1970 to 4.12.2006 reviles that there are no any encumbrance mentioned in favour of the Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch. Thereby it goes to show that even though there was allegation by the prosecution that accused No.1 has not properly verified the existence of charge over the property belonging to accused No.2 does not hold any force. In this regard, at the cost of repetition, I repeat that as accused No.1 has made reasonable, bonafide and sufficient efforts at the time of verification of the said title deed of the properties bearing Sy. No.39 and 43 and he has also got legal Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 55 opinion from the panel advocate and found that there were no encumbrance mentioned in the said property in favour of the Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Therefore, the accused No.1 cannot be blamed to the effect that there was already charge created by the accused No.2 in respect of the said property which was suppressed by him.
21. Further, it was also alleged against the accused No.1, That he has not obtained any legal opinion or second legal opinion before sanctioning of the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. In this regard, at the cost of repetition, I repeat that accused No.1 already obtained legal opinion from K. Ramesh Kumar, PW.22 and as he did not found any necessity to get another opinion and very particularly even the PW-5, the AGM of the Regional Office has also not raised any objection for sanctioning of the said loan. Further he has also obtained valuation report dated 25-04-2007 submitted by P.W.20 Sri. C. Manohar, of Manu Association in respect landed property. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 56 accused No.1 has negligently without due diligence has recommended the said loan without obtaining the second opinion in respect of the property furnished by the accused No.2.
22. Further, PW.12 Prakash Chandra Shetty who was worked as a Chief Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch from 31.5.2011 to 30.11.2012 i.e., he is the second successor of the accused No.1's office has deposed in his examination-in-chief at para-5 with regard to the procedure of getting the loan application and processing the same. He has deposed in his cross- examination at page No.41 at 8th line of para 6 that "I got the opinion as per Ex.P155(b) from the Panel Advocate, in Ex.P155(b), our Panel Advocate has given opinion that only Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Bank has charge over the said property and not Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch"
Thereby the opinion already formed by the accused No.1 that the property submitted by Accusedno.2 as a security for the said loan is valid one. Further, this witness in his Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 57 examination-in-chief itself at page No.5 has after third line deposed that "We further came to know that, before availing loan from Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Rajanna has availed advance from Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch by giving security of the above property itself which was not brought to the knowledge of Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch at the time of availing loan from the said Branch."
Thereby it fortify the acts of the accused No.1 that he was not aware of the charge created by the accused No.2 in respect of the said properties in favour of the Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Hence, the act of the accused No.1 appears that he acted bonafidely and diligently in getting the proper security in support of the said loan application. Further, in page No.39 of his cross- examination in the first line this witness has reiterated "At the time of sanctioning the loan to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, the regional office of the bank has not raised any objection regarding trade licence for starting and running Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. The loan was sanctioned to Sri Srai Poultry Breeding Farm as per the norms of the bank and further sanctioned terms were modified as per the norms of the bank. There was nothing wrong in Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 58 the borrower putting the margin money by way of cash and it is in order".
Thereby it goes to show that the said loan application was processed by the accused No.1 diligently and bonafidely. Further, in page No.40 at para No.5 of his cross-examination, this witness deposed that:
"In the loan documents which were in the file (loan documents of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm) there was no document or any encumbrance certificate which showed that there was earlier encumbrance of the property mortgaged to the above said branch in favour of Kalpatharu Grameen Bank, Rajanukunte Branch. I had not gone to the Sub-Registrar office to enquire regarding whether there was earlier mortgage in favour of Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajankunte Branch or not. As per the loan documents that were available in the Branch (Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch), there was no prior mortgage of the property mortgaged for taking the loan in favour of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm."
Therefore, on going through the evidence of PW.12, it clearly fortify the fact that the accused No.2 has not brought to the notice of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch in respect of the earlier mortgage of the said property in favour of the Kalpatharu Grameena Bank.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 59 Further, PW.16 Ravishankar Mishra who worked as a Senior Manager, Agriculture in Vijaya Bank, Regional Office from June 2007 to March 2008 has deposed in the examination-in-chief that "The main job of Senior Manager, Agriculture in Vijaya Bank, Regional office is to monitor the agricultural lending progress of the Branches, to process the loan applications received at the Regional Office and falling under the delegated powers of executives at Regional Office, to liaison with State Level Bankers Committee and NABARD and other development Departments for inter institutional co- ordination and also to prepare and submit periodical returns to various agencies including Bank's Head Office and to provide technical support to the Branches and to the field level agricultural officers."
Further, he has also spoken about the Ex.P6 Project Report submitted by the Eco Bio Tech Agri Clinic, Nelamangala in respect of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Ex.P7 appraisal report submitted by Agricultural Officer and 3 other officials of the bank where they have ultimately recommended that the project is economically viable and recommended the loan for consideration. Further, he has also fortified the fact in page No.6 at Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 60 para-18 that presanction inspection of the farm was already conducted and kept in the record. Further, during the course of cross-examination at page 7 in para- 2, he deposed that:
"My predecessor in Regional Office Smt. Shamala was handling the Agricultural section and she had scrutinized the loan papers pertaining to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm received from the Branch. The pre sanction inspection was necessary for the loan sought by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and it was also done. I have not raised any objection regarding the loan papers submitted by Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Before me, Smt. Shamala had scrutinized the loan papers submitted by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and I also verified the same and placed it before the Regional Credit Committee. The Regional Credit Committee take the decision whether to accept the proposal or not and once if the Regional Credit Committee approves the proposal then it will be placed before the sanctioning authority Asst. General Manager, Credit, Regional Office through Chief Manager. There was no query in the Regional Office regarding the proposal of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and it was accepted by the Regional Credit Committee and sanctioned by the AGM with terms and conditions imposed by AGM".
Further, he has also deposed that the loan sanctioned to Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm also comes under Agricultural loan and in concluding his evidence he has Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 61 deposed that the loan sanctioned to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm was according to banking norms. Therefore, on going through the evidence of PW.16, the Agricultural Officer of Regional Office, Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru, it is clear that the said loan application was in accordance with banking norms. Therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that accused No.1 has colluded with the accused No.2 and has not properly verified and scrutinized the said loan papers submitted by the accused No.2 as alleged.
23. Further, PW.18 R.S. Doddabyregowda, Post Graduate in Agricultural Sciences with qualification of M.Sc., (Ag.) has deposed that he took voluntary retirement from the bank and undergone intensive training under Agri Clinic and Agri Business Center scheme sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India and further he has deposed that from 2006 he is running a proprietorship firm called M/s Eco Biotech Agri Clinic and Agri Business Center at Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 62 Nelamangala. In para-2 of his chief-examination he has deposed that:
"In June 2006, A2 Rajanna approached me and told me that, he wants to take loan from the bank for poultry project (breeding farm) and requested me to prepare a detailed project report in that respect covering all the aspect of technical, economical and financial. Accordingly I prepared the project report based on the guidelines issued by National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development. In my project report I have covered aspects regarding breed, size of the shed, cage system, feed, feed cost, construction cost and also operational cost, etc. as per the guidelines of the NABARD".
He has submitted project report as per Ex.P.6. Therefore, on going through the evidence of PW.18, who is expert having rich experience in the matter of agricultural tax has prepared the project report in accordance with guidelines of NABARD. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has not diligent in scrutinizing the said report. Further, during the cross- examination at second line of para 8 in page No.5, this witness has deposed that "I have visited the land of accused No.2 situated at Itkalpura village, Rajanakunte, Hesaragatta Hobli. It is true to suggest that the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 63 land of accused No.2 was very suitable for running the Poultry Breeding Farm."
24. Further, it is also admitted fact that PW.5, the then Asst. General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Sri. S. Anantha Swamy has deposed during the cross-examination at para-5 of page No.8 that "The loan proposal along with other documents in respect of the loan sought by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm was received by the Regional office on 20.3.2007. Queries were put up on 22.3.2007 by the Regional Office and the replies were received for the same from the Branch on 6.7.2007. After receiving the replies from the Branch, the file was put up before me on 31.7.2007 by my staff and the loan has been sanctioned on 6.8.2007. I have issued the modification in sanction terms and conditions on 22.11.2007 as per Ex.P.14. The modification is in respect of cage system to slat system. Further, in the same paragraph he has deposed that "The sanction of the loan and modification of the sanction terms and conditions is the discretion of the Regional office:"
Therefore, in view of the evidence of the PW.5 it fortify the fact that PW.5 the then Asst. General Manager had sanctioned the said loan after clarifying the queries he ordered for modification of the said sanction of the loan.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 64 Therefore, it goes to show that the loan application was properly processed by the accused No.1 and he has not shown any negligence in processing the said loan application.
25. Further, ongoing through the evidence of PW.5, S. Anantha Swamy who has worked as Asst. General Manager of Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Bengaluru from May 2007 up to December 2007 has specifically deposed that he has perused loan application of the accused No.2, appraisal report as per Ex.P.7 and he has also noticed that on 8.9.2006 accused No.1, P.W.15 S.S. Sridhar, Agricultural Officer, Chikkaballapura have visited the said unit i.e., pre- inspection of the said site and he has also scrutinized the loan documents along with the loan application dated 16.10.2006. Further, he has also taken the revised loan application as per Ex.P12 submitted by the branch dated 10.3.2007 and he has also considered the branch process note submitted to the Regional Office on 20.3.2007 and additional particulars were called for on Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 65 22.3.2007 and received at the Regional Office on 6.7.2007.
26. Further, admittedly, even though the said loan application was filed on 16.10.2006, in fact the pre- inspection of the said site was conducted on 8.9.2006 by PW-5 S. Anantha Swamy then Assistant Manger along with Sri. S. Sridhar, Agricultural Officer, Chikkaballapur and A-1 i.e., much prior to the receipt of the loan application. Therefore, it goes to show that there was no any personal interest of the accused No.1 involved in the said process or sanctioning the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the PW.5 specifically deposed that before sanction of the said loan, the bank will scrutinize the pre-inspection report and the panel valuers report regarding the property offered as a security to the said loan and the said loan application will be processed in the credit mountain committee. As branch has complied all the conditions, after processing the said application, he has sanctioned the said loan. Further, he has also deposed that if there are any irregularities in the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 66 loan application, if the insufficient security is provided and if all the procedures are not followed, the Regional Office may reject the said application.
27. Further, PW.5 the then General Manager of the Vijaya Bank, Regional Office in para-3 of his examination-in-chief has specifically deposed as per the valuation report, the property offered as a collateral security by the borrower is worth more than Rs.4 crores. Further, he has deposed that at the time of sanctioning the said loan he had no doubts regarding the documents given in respect of the property offered as collateral security by the borrower.
28. Further, PW.5 in fourth line of page 7 his examination-in-chief, has specifically deposed that:-
"As AGM working in the Regional Office, unless and until I am satisfied about the loan proposal and the loan documents sent to the Regional office, I will not sanction the loan. In this case also after satisfying about the loan papers and other formalities and also about the security offered by the borrower, I have sanctioned the loan. At the time of sanctioning the loan, we will also see about the source of margin amount that has to be mobilized by that borrower."
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 67 Further, in the same page after fifteen lines he has deposed that: -
Before sanctioning the loan the panel valuer has also given the valuation report regarding the property offered as security by the borrower. Apart from the valuation given by H.S. Nagaran, Panel Valuer, I had also taken another valuation from C. Manohar, another panel valuer. In the process note Ex.P12 there is mention that Sri. Ramesh Kumar, Advocate who is the panel has scrutinized the title deed and all other related document and submitted a detail report to the branch on 17.1.2007. Further, in Ex.P12, it is clearly mentioned that there is no prior mortgage/charges as per the encumbrance certificate for the period 1.4.1970 to 14.12.2006 in respect of 5 acres 27 guntas of agricultural land under Sy. No.39 and Sy.43 of Itagalapura village, Hesaragatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk to be mortgaged to the bank".
Further, he has specifically deposed that after considering the above said process note as per Ex.P12 and other documents sent to the Regional Office, he has sanctioned the loan.
29. Further, on perusal of the evidence of PW.64, the Investigating Officer of this case during the course of cross-examination at beginning of page No.21 has specifically deposed which I would like to reproduce as under: -
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 68 "It is true to suggest that in the present case, the entire loan amount was sanctioned by the Zonal Office. It is true to suggest that the loan was for establishment of Poultry, breeding. It is true to suggest that prior to the receipt of loan application, the pre-sanction inspection of loan was conducted by the AGM of Regional Office and Agricultural Officer along with the Branch Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch.
Further, at beginning of para No.98 in page 21 of his cross-examination he has deposed as under: -
It is true to suggest that the Branch Manager after receiving the loan documents, conducted the inspection of property and then deputed the approved valuer of the bank to conduct the valuation of the property. It is true to suggest that the panel advocate of the Bank has given legal opinion for processing the loan application. It is true to suggest that the proposal was processed and loan was sanctioned by the Regional Office as per the banking norms but subject to fulfillment of the terms and conditions imposed in the sanction order.
30. Therefore, ongoing through the entire evidence above referred and the documents on record, it clearly goes to show that the said loan application belonged to the accused No.2 was processed by the accused No.1, Senior Branch Manager, the PW.15 the then Agricultural Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 69 Officer of Chikkaballapura and thereafter the said loan application was sent along with the appraisal value report in respect of the property submitted as a security to the Regional Office, in the Regional Office after scrutinizing the said application along with documents, they have sought for clarification. Further they also got revised the loan application and got clarified the all the doubts and got some other documents as per their requirements for sanction of the loan. Further, on scrutinizing of the documents, as all the norms and conditions of the bank were complied, then only the said loan application was sanctioned by the Regional Office. Even the Investigating Officer who has filed the charge sheet has admitted that there was no any irregularity or illegality in sanction and modification of the said loan. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.1 was not having hand in glove in sanctioning of the said application. This goes to show that there is no any conspiracy of accused No.1 with the accused No.2 in Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 70 recommending and sanctioning of the said loan application of accused No.2.
31. Now, I would like to discuss further with regard to the subsequent process and compliance of the said loan application after its sanction. It is the specific allegation of the prosecution that the accused No.1 has not complied KYC norms at the time of the opening of the bank account and he has not followed the due procedure required for the opening of the account. In this regard, I would like to discuss that Babu Engineering Works account was opened in regime of the accused No.1. He collected the Driving Licence of the Dadapeer. Further, it is admitted fact that as the said Babu Engineering Works is doing labour contract work, he will not have licence for the same. Therefore, even if the accused No.1 has not collected the licence for running the said Babu Engineering Works, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 was negligent and has not complied the process for permitting the Babu Engineering Works to open the bank account. Further, in respect of the M/s. Lakshmi Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 71 Ranganath Cement & Hardware Account, the accused No.1 has followed all the process for opening said account. It can be seen from the documents that the accused No.1 has collected the Driving Licence of K. Nagaraj, one of the partner of the Lakshmi Ranganath Cement & Hardware. Further admittedly the accused No.2 Rajanna is the partner in the said firm, he has signed as an introducer to the said account opening form. Therefore, the accused No.1 relying on the introduction made by the accused No.2 and the Driving Licence of K. Nagaraj, after following the due process has permitted to open the bank account in his branch.
32. Further, it is also case of the prosecution that, the accused No.1 has not followed of maintaining margin amount at the time of the disbursal of the said loan amount to the accused No.2. In this regard as per the Ex.P.12 Process Note dated 3.8.2007 prepared by the Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Bengaluru (containing 29 sheets) in page No.6 under the head Project Outlay & Means of Finance, the total investment under the Project Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 72 has been shown. As per the said table, the total cost of the project including Land Development, Building & Civil Constructions, Plant & Machineries, Power Supply & Electrification, Vehicle, Capitalised Bird (2 Batches) & Feed Cost, Furniture & Fixtures and Working Capital is shown at Rs.503.78 lakhs. The bank loan in respect of the above said items has been sanctioned at Rs.323.70 lakhs, the borrowers' margin shown in respect of all the above said items at Rs.180.08 lakhs, so also margin percentage of the cost in respect of the above said items has been shown 35.75%. Ongoing through the said table, for each item, there is a separate margin amount has been shown. Therefore, it can be gathered from the said table that the bank has sanctioned the loan of Rs.323.70 lakhs and borrower has to contribute margin money of Rs.180.08 maintaining the ratio in respect of each item therein. But, during the course of evidence of PW.2 Sathish Ballal, the then Deputy General Manager of Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru and the then Asst. General Manager in Chairman Secretariat, Head Office, Vijaya Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 73 Bank, Bangalore and was also working as Secretary to the CMD (Chairman & Managing Director) has deposed at the end of para 15 of page 5 in examination-in-chief that as per the Ex.P.12 (a) terms and conditions of loan, he has specifically given opinion that as "The borrower has to maintain the minimum margin of Rs.35.75% of the cost of the project." During the course of cross- examination at page No.15, para-11, he has admitted "The above said margin of the borrower of 35.75% and not 35% as stated by me above. The above said 35.75% is in respect of the total project cost". Therefore, the learned advocate for the accused No.1 vehemently argued that it is not necessary for the accused No.2 to maintain the said margin at the time of the release of the loan amount for each item. In other words, the said margin amount can be covered and recouped at the time of release of the loan amount in respect of other items also. It is just and sufficient, if the total margin money contributed by the accused No.2 comes to 35.75%. Therefore, considering the Ex.P.12 and the evidence of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 74 PW.2 corroborated by the arguments of the advocate for the accused no.1, I do also admit that there is a reasonable ground to believe that if the accused No.2 even if has not maintained the margin at either of the items at the time of releasing of the loan amount. But it is just and sufficient if he maintains the said margin amount at the time of total release of the said loan amount as per the table shown in Ex.P.12.
33. Now, I would like to discuss whether the accused No.1 has made best of efforts to recover and maintain the said margin amount from the accused No.2 at the time of release of the said loan amount to accused No.2. The Ex.P.17 is the file containing the requisition made by the accused No.2 i.e., Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the loan amount in favour of the Babu Engineering Works. In this regard, on perusal of the requisition letters submitted by the accused No.2, there is an endorsement made by the accused No.1 at Ex.P.17 (a) to (k), it can be seen that the accused No.1 has made endorsement by passing order directing his Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 75 officials to release the said loan amount as per the said requisition subject to maintaining the margin money as per the sanction order. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.1 being the Senior Manager of the said bank on receipt of the requisition from the accused No.2 for release of the loan amount, after scrutinizing the documents has ordered for release of the amount by making an endorsement on the said Ex.P.17 documents at Ex.P.17(a) to (k). Therefore, it is the clerk or official is to verify the said endorsement and release the said amount by complying the margin amount. Therefore, on perusal of the said documents, it can be said that there is no negligence on the part of the accused No.1 in releasing the said amount in favour of the Babu Engineering Works without complying the margin amount.
34. Further, admittedly the said requisition letters of the accused No.2 for the release of the loan are also accompanied by the receipt of the Babu Engineering Works and also the request letter made by Babu Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 76 Engineering Works demanding payment of the said amount. Admittedly, the Babu Engineering Works has carried out labour work and fabrication works. Obviously, it is also case of the Babu Engineering Works that he being doing labour work, he does not have any licence. So also, as he is rendering service by way of labour, he is not creating bills. He is demanding the said labour charges by way of letters and acknowledging the said amount by giving valid receipt. Ex.P.17 contains the requisition letter of the accused No.2, the requisition letter by Babu Engineering Works demanding payment of the amount for having carried out the labour work in the said site, the receipt by the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for having received the said part of the loan amount as per the requisition, and also receipt of the Babu Engineering Works for having received the said amount as per the demand made for payment of the labour charges. PW.27 Mahaboob who is the younger brother of Dadapeer PW.28, have deposed before this court and admitted for having provided labours to the accused No.2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 77 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and the said both witnesses have deposed that they have done Engineering Works and has done truss work, steel fitting in respect of the sheds constructed by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Further, the said both witnesses also admitted for having received the said amount from the accused No.2 as per the Ex.P.17. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.2 has paid the said amount to the Babu Engineering Works after he got released the part of the loan amount as per his requisition submitted to the bank. Further, PW.28 Dadapeer has specifically admitted in the examination-in-chief itself in respect of his signature on the receipt found in the Ex.P.17 for having received the said amount from the accused No.2 as per Ex.P17(n) to
(v).
35. Further, as per the Ex.P.18, the documents containing 216 pages, similar procedure has been adopted by the accused No.1 at the time of release of the amount in favour of Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 78 Hardware, as per the requisition made by the accused No.1.
36. I have perused the Ex.P.18 the set of documents, wherein at Ex.P.18(a) to 18(o), there is an endorsement & order made by the accused No.1 on the requisition letters of Accused No.2 farm to the effect for release the said amount after recovering the margin amount as per the sanction order.
37. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.18 file containing 216 pages, the requisition of the accused No.2 for release of the loan amount in favour of the Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware was accompanied by the letter of Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware, and cash bills in respect of the purchase of sand, jelly, square plates (1/2" thickness), cement (Birla Super), hallow bricks, welding rods, nut and bolts, door fittings, binding wire 6 mm tar steel, shawells, bricks, stone slabs, accompanied by the receipts for having received the said amount from the accused No.2, so also the receipts from accused No.2 Sri Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 79 Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for having received the said loan amount. Here also, it can be said that the accused No.1 was diligent and has made specific endorsement by giving direction to his subordinate officers to release the said amount as per the requisition of accused No.2 subject to maintaining the margin as per the sanction order. Further, there is an allegation by the prosecution that the accused No.1 has not collected invoices and bills. In this regard, admittedly, as per the Ex.P.18, it can be seen that it contains the cash bills of Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware as stated above. A prudent officer or man cannot doubt such bills unless and until any suspicion against the accused No.2. Further, PW.17 K. Seetharama Shetty, Senior Branch Manager, Yalahanka Bank worked from February 2008 to March 2009 i.e., successor of the accused No.1 has deposed during the examination-in-chief at page No.2 as under: -
"One Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement and Hardware was supplying the cement, jelly, sand, bricks etc., to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 80 Farm and an amount of Rs.28 lakhs out of the loan amount released has been credited to the current account of Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement and Hardware towards supply of building materials to the borrower."
Therefore, the PW.17 has also released the part of the amount to Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement and Hardware fortify the fact that the said institution was supplying the said materials to the accused No.2 i.e., Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
38. Further, PW.64 the Investigating Officer of this case during the cross-examination at page No.22, para- 100 has admitted that "It is true to suggest that there was no material forthcoming against the supplier of cement and hardware, proprietor of Lakshmi Ranganatha Cements & Hardware. Therefore, I have not made him as accused in this case. So also I have not made PW.27 and 28 as accused for want of materials".
Therefore, it goes to show that even the Investigating Officer has not came into cross or collected any documents to show that no materials have been supplied by the Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware to Sri Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 81 Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and he has not found any mischievous or illegality by Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware. So also, the PW.64, Investigating Officer has also admitted that he did not collect any incriminating evidence or materials against the proprietor of the Babu Engineering Works i.e., PW.28 B. Dadapeer and his brother PW.27 B. Mahaboob. This also fortify the fact that the Investigating Officer has not suspected or collected any incriminating evidence against PW.27 and 28 to the effect that they have not provided their service of labour charges to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
39. Further, admittedly the accused No.2 has availed the said loan for the purpose of his poultry farming. Further, as per the valuation report and appraiser's report, which I would like to refer in this judgment at later stage, it goes to show that there are already building materials, and other materials were made use of by the accused No.2. Further, the said valuers have given their opinion with regard to the value of the building, and materials lying in the said site. The Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 82 said reports go to show that the accused No.2 has made use of the said materials for the poultry farm. Therefore, one cannot be suspect with regard to the bills submitted by accused No.2 along with the requisition slips for release of the said loan amount.
40. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.23, the loan released in favour of the Accused No.2 for making payment to the Aryan Iron & Steel Co., for having purchased Iron and Steel. On perusal of the Ex.P.23 (f) to (l), there is an endorsement and order of the accused No.1 on the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount. The said endorsement reads directing the officials of the bank to release the said loan amount subject to maintaining the margin amount as per the sanction order.
41. Further, the said Aryan Pipes India Pvt., Ltd., have furnished Proforma Invoice along with the receipt for having received the said amount. Here also, there is a serious allegation by the prosecution that the accused No.1 has released the said amount in favour of the Aryan Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 83 Pipes India Pvt., Ltd., only on the basis of the proforma invoices. In this regard, the said Ex.P.23 is accompanied by Ex.P.23(a) to (e), the DDs issued by the Vijaya Bank in favour of Aryan Iron & Steel Co., which have been received by the said company. Therefore, it goes to show that the said amount has been credited to the said suppliers who have supplied the said materials. Merely the fact that there is no invoice of the said company it cannot be considered as illegal, at the most it can be an irregularity and not illegality. Because admittedly the said materials as per the proforma invoice have already been delivered to the accused No.2 and the said company has received the said amount.
42. Further, as per the Ex.P.24, it contains the requisition made by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the loan amount for payment to Vijeet Steels for having supplied G.I. Wire as per the proforma invoice, accompanied by the receipt for having received the said amount by the Vijeet Steels and also receipt of the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for having received the said loan Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 84 amount which has been paid in turn to the Vijeet Steels. Further, in Ex.P.171, there are as many 10 Invoices were found issued by the Vijeet Steels for having supplied the materials to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Further, in the Ex.P.24, on the requisition letter submitted by the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm, accused No.1 has made specific endorsement at Ex.P.24(d-1), (e-1), (f-1), (g), (h-2), (i-2), (j-1), (l-1), (k-1) directing his subordinate officer to release the part of the said loan amount as per the requisition after complying the margin money as per the sanction order. Further, the said Ex.P.24 also contains the DD issued by the Vijaya Bank in favour of the Vijeet Steels in respect of the said loan amount released, thereby it fortify the fact that the said amount of loan released to the accused No.2 has been paid to the Vijeet Steels for having supplied the said materials. In this regard, PW.31, Vinod V Malve the partner of the said Vijeet Steels has deposed before this court that they are dealing in angles, TMT pipes and tubes, etc., (iron and steels commodities). Further, this witness has deposed Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 85 that Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm has approached his firm for supply of iron and steel commodities for poultry construction activities. And he has given the proforma invoice and accordingly he has supplied the materials and received the DD from the accused No.2. Whenever there is shortage of supply of materials, he has returned the said amount through cheques. This witness identified his proforma invoices at Ex.P.24(m), (n), (o) and he also identified the invoices dated 21.11.2007, 19.11.2007, 21.11.2007, 5.1.2008, 24.12.2007, 24.12.2007, 1.1.2008, 31.12.2007 and 2.11.2007 issued by the Vijeet Steels in favour of Sri Sai Poultry Farm as per Ex.P.152(b) to (j). Further, he has also deposed that whenever they have supplied materials they have raised delivery challans along with tax invoices. This witness identifies the delivery challans along with the tax invoices as per Ex.P.171. Therefore, on perusal of the said documents and the evidence of PW.31, it goes to show that the said amount has been released by the accused No.1 in favour of the accused No.2 as per the requisition Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 86 made by the accused No.2 diligently and after complying the sanction order.
43. Further, as per the Ex.P.25 containing the requisition made by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan amount to M/s Kanaga Poultry Service accompanied by the receipt issued by the Accused no.2, and the Invoices issued by the Kanaga Poultry Services. On perusal of the said requisition letters issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm there is an endorsement on all the said requisitions at Ex.P.25(a) to (c) wherein accused No.1 has endorsed & ordered on the said requisitions for release of the said part of the loan amount by considering the margin amount as per the sanction order. Therefore, here also it can be seen that the accused No.1 has bonafidely and diligently has made the said endorsement by complying the sanction order. Therefore, it cannot be blamed that the accused No.1 has not taken into consideration the marginal amount at the time of release of the loan amount to M/s Kanaga Poultry Service. Further, the said M/s Kanaga Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 87 Poultry Service have also submitted their invoices and quotations for supply of K.P. Female Feeder, K.P. Chick drinker plus classic drinker along with the receipt for having received the said amount from the accused No.2. Further, PW.25 Sharavanan who is the proprietor of the M/s Kanaga Poultry Services has deposed that he is dealing in manufacturing and marketing of poultry equipments and his factory is in Kacharakanahalli but sales office is in Lalbagh Fort Road, Bengaluru. Further, he has deposed that Accused.no.2 has placed orders twice or thrice for supply of the poultry equipments and he has supplied poultry equipments worth around Rs.15 lakhs to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. In this regard accused No.2 has given him two DDs obtained from Vijaya Bank for Rs.6,60,163/- and another DD for Rs.5,98,663/-. Further, this witness volunteers that he has not yet received balance amount from the accused No.2. Further, the said witness also admits the copy of the Invoices at Ex.P.150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 were issued by the M/s Kanaga Poultry Service. He also Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 88 identifies the quotations issued by the M/s Kanaga Poultry Service at Ex.P.25(d) to 25(j). Therefore, the said documents at Ex.P.25 read with evidence of PW.25, it goes to show that the release of the said part of the loan amount by the accused No.1 has been paid to the m/s Kanaga Poultry Services by the accused No.2. Therefore, here also it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has shown his negligence in releasing of the said part of the loan amount to the accused no.2 to be paid to M/s Kanaga Poultry Service.
44. As per Ex.P.26, the documents containing requisition by the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan amount, accompanied by the Proforma Invoice to M/s. Ramco Industries Limited, accompanied by receipts issued by the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for having received the said part of the loan amount and also receipts issued by the M/s.Ramco Industries for having received the said amount from accused No.2 through DD of Vijaya Bank. On perusal of the Ex.P.26, on the requisition letter issued by the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 89 accused No.2 for release of the loan amount at Ex.P.26(a), there is an endorsement & order by the accused No.1 directing to release the said requisite amount by considering the margin amount as per the sanction order. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.169, twelve invoices were found. In this regard, PW.30 Govindaraju Deputy General Manager of M/s Ramco Industries has deposed to that effect that he has received DD for Rs.7,95,750 for having supplied the roofing sheets to Sai Poultry Farm. Therefore, even if the said amount has been released on the basis of the only proforma invoices and the accused No.1 has not collected the invoice, when the said Ramco Industries have received the said amount released by the Vijaya Bank through the accused No.2 and the said materials have been supplied by the said Ramco Industries, it cannot be said that the non-collecting of the invoice amounts to illegality. In this regard, PW.30 Govindarajan who is working as Marketing Head of Ramco Industries has deposed before this court that the said industry is dealing in asbestos roofing Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 90 sheets. Further, this witness has deposed that the accused No.2 Proprietor of the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm has approached for supply of the roofing sheets and he asked to give proforma invoice, thereafter, the accused No.2 gave him advance amount by way of cheque for Rs. Four lakhs and blocked the price of the product. After 15 to 20 days, the accused No.2 brought DD from the bank for Rs.7,95,750/- in favour of the Ramco Industries and requested for supply of the sheets and accordingly he has supplied the roofing sheets to the extent of the said DD amount. This witness identified the proforma invoice issued by their company at Ex.P.26(c). Further, even though he has received a cheque in advance for Rs.4 lakhs, in fact as his company has supplied materials for only Rs.7,95,750/- and not Rs.11 lakhs and odd as per the proforma invoice at Ex.P.26. He has returned the said amount to the accused No.2. Further, this witness also identifies 12 invoices regarding supply of the roofing sheets and accessories at Ex.P.169. Further, during the course of cross-examination this Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 91 witness admits that there is no amount due from the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm to the Ramco Industries. Thereby it goes to show that the amount released by the accused No.1 to the accused No.2 as per his requisition for supply of the roofing sheets to be paid to Ramco Industries is bonafide and justified one.
45. As per Ex.P.90 consisting of requisition made by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan amount to be paid to Sri Vinayaka Enterprise accompanied by the receipt issued by the Accused No.2, receipts issued by the Managing Partner of Sri Vinayaka Enterprises and Proforma Invoices of the Sri Vinayaka Enterprises and also DD issued by Vijaya Bank in favour of Vinayaka Enterprises. On perusal of the Ex.P.90, the requisition issued by the Accused.no.2, there is an endorsement on the said letter by the accused No.1 at Ex.P.90(a) for release of the said amount by considering the margin amount as per the sanction order. Therefore, it also goes to show that the accused No.1 has considered the margin amount at the time of the releasing the said Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 92 amount in favour of the accused No.2 as per the requisition at Ex.P.90. PW.44 A.H. Nagaraj has deposed that accused No.2 is the younger brother of his wife, he know Vinayaka Enterprises of Arishinakunte, himself, accused NO.2 were partners of said Vinayaka Enterprises and he do not how much share he has contributed and how much share the accused No.2 has contributed. Further, he has deposed that there is a partnership agreement between himself and accused No.2 regarding Vinayaka Enterprises. This witness has spoken that many years back, the said Vinayaka Enterprises has closed as there is a financial loss. This witness has not produced any documents to show that the said business has been closed. In this regard, the accused No.2 has dealt in with the said Vinayaka Enterprises as per Ex.P.91 for supply of Soya, D.O.R.B., Deccan Maize goes to show that the said institution is still working. Further, on perusal of the DD which has been encashed by the said Vinayaka Enterprises fortifies the said fact. Therefore, it appears that the PW.44 A.H. Nagaraj who Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 93 even does not know what is extent of his share in the said partnership firm. It appears that he has also not properly remembering the continents of the partnership deed of the said Vinayaka Enterprises. Further it can be gathered that A.H. Nagaraj might not have taken any interest in the said business. Therefore, the evidence of PW.44 will not come in way of accused No.2 for having purchased the said fodderies for his Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Therefore, even if the accused No.1 has not collected the invoice for having released the said amount as per the requisition made by Accused.no.2 at Ex.P.90, it cannot be said to be an illegal one. It can be at the most considered as irregularity.
46. As per Ex.P.92, containing the requisition made by Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan amount for purchase of the M.S. Sheet, Flat H.S. from Vinayaka & Co., accompanied by the quotation at Ex.P.92(b) & (c) issued by the Vinayaka & Co., receipt issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm at Ex.P.92(a), the DD drawn in favour of the Vinayaka & Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 94 Co., issued by the Vijaya Bank at Ex.P.92(d). Further, similar documents have been furnished at Ex.P.93 and Ex.P.94. On perusal of the said documents, at Ex.P.92(e), 93(e), there is an endorsement by the accused No.1 for release of the said loan amount by considering the margin amount. Therefore, it can be taken into note that accused No.1 has considered the margin amount at the time of the release of the said amount to the accused no.2 as per the requisition at Ex.P.92 and 93. PW.33 Sathish, Proprietor of Vinayaka & Co., has deposed before this court that the accused No.2 approached him for purchase of the iron and steel (structural steel) and accordingly, he gave quotations mentioning the cost of the materials. Afterwards, Accused No.2 brought DD of bank and he has supplied the said materials as per the said DD. This witness identify the quotation issued by him at Ex.P.92(b), 93(c), 94(c). Further, he has also admitted for having received the said DDs at Ex.P.92(d), 93(d), 94(d) for having supplied the said materials to the accused No.2. Further, as per Ex.P.178, sixteen set of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 95 the Cash Credit/Invoices of Vinayak & Co., were found. Therefore, it goes to show that the Vinayak & Co., has also issued invoices in respect of the materials supplied by it. Therefore, the evidence of PW.33 read with the above said documents, it goes to show that the said materials have been actually supplied by the PW.33 to the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has not collected the invoice in respect of the supply of the said materials, as such it will not affect adversely in respect of the release of the said amount to the accused No.2.
47. As per Ex.P.95, it contains the requisition made by the accused No.2 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan to be paid to M/s Preethi Constructions, accompanied by quotations of the said Preethi Constructions for supply of the Feed Lifting Elevator, Hammer Mill, Elevator, Storage Bin, Mixer along with the receipt for having received the cheque amount, also along with the receipt given by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for having received the part of the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 96 loan amount. On perusal of the Ex.P.25 (e), the Endorsement made by the accused No.1 on the requisition issued by the accused No.2 for release of the said loan, it is specifically speaks that to release the said amount subject to margin as per the sanction order. Further, admittedly even though the accused No.1 has not collected the Invoices for having supplied the materials by the M/s. Preethi Constructions, but the said Preethi Constructions Company has issued the receipt for having received the cheque amount for the materials supplied by them. PW.39 Preethi. R., the proprietor of the M/s. Preethi Constructions has deposed before this court that she is manufacturing feed machineries regarding poultry cattle and piggery etc. Further, she had deposed that till 2007, her father was looking after the business of the said M/s. Preethi Constructions, from 2007 to 2012, her mother was looking after the Preethi Constructions. Now she herself is looking after the said business. Further, this witness during her examination in chief at para-3 identified the quotations issued by the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 97 M/s. Preethi Constructions at Ex.P.95(b) and her sister Preetha. R's signature on the said quotations. Further, she also identified the receipt issued by her mother at Ex.P.95(c) for having received the amount from Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for supply of materials. Therefore, on reading the said quotations at Ex.P.95, supported by the evidence of PW.39, it goes to show that even though the Invoice has not been collected by the accused No.1, it cannot be said that the materials were not been supplied to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Therefore, it can be considered an irregularity and not illegality in disbursing the said part of the loan amount to the accused No.2 to be paid to Preethi Constructions by the accused No.1.
48. On perusal of the Ex.P.96 & 97, it contains the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the proforma invoice of M/s. Pioneer Hatcheries Pvt., Ltd., receipt issued by the Pioneer Hatcheries Pvt., Ltd., receipt issued by the accused No.2 for having received the said part of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 98 the loan amount. In this regard, on perusal of the Ex.P.97, the requisitions made by the accused No.2 for release of the said loan amount, there is an endorsement by the accused No.1 directing Mr. Abraham to release the said amount being 64.25% by collecting margin amount as per the sanction order. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.1 has released the said amount by maintaining the margin amount as per the sanction order. Further, admittedly even though there is no invoice issued by the M/s.Pioneer Hatcheries Pvt., Ltd., but there is a receipt issued by the said Pioneer Hatcheries Pvt., Ltd., at Ex.P.97(b), it goes to show that the said company has made acknowledgment for having received the said amount for supply of the materials to the accused No.2 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Therefore, here also when the said Pioneer Hatcheries Pvt., Ltd., has already supplied materials and has issued receipts, it cannot be said that non-collecting of invoice by the accused No.1 from the said company amounts to an illegality.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 99
49. On perusal of the Ex.P.98, containing the requisition made by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for release of the part of the loan amount, accompanied by the Tax Invoice of M/s. Kundan Electronics, accompanied by the receipt issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.98, there is an endorsement at Ex.P.98(c) by the accused No.1 directing M/s. Lakshmi Devamma to release the said part of the loan amount subject to maintaining the margin amount. Therefore, here also, the accused No.1 has maintained the margin amount at the time of the release of the part loan amount to the accused No.2 for having purchased the L.G. Refrigerator along with the Stabilizer.
50. On perusal of Ex.P.99 & 100 contains the requisitions made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Invoices issued by the M/s. Padam Prakash Electricals accompanied by the receipts issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. On perusal of the Ex.P.99(g) and 100(c), there is an endorsement made by the accused No.1 to Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 100 release the said part of the loan amount subject to maintaining the margin amount. Here also, accused No.1 was alert in maintaining the margin amount at the time of the release of the said amount as prayed by the accused No.2 for purchase of electrical equipments as per the Tax Invoice at Ex.P.99(b) to P99(f) and 100(b) to 100(d).
51. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.101, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the loan amount accompanied by the Proforma Invoices issued by the M/s.Kundan Electronics accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2. Here also even though accused No.2 has not collected the Invoices of the Kundan Electronics, it cannot be said to be illegal one as the said part of the loan amount is released by way of Bankers Cheque in the name of the M/s. Kundan Electronics. Therefore, obviously the said Bankers cheque will be collected and realised by the Kundan Electronics itself. Hence, it cannot be said that the accused No.2 has misused or diverted the said amount Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 101 other than for having purchased the electrical equipments from M/s.Kundan Electronics.
52. On perusal of the Ex.P.102, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the quotation of M/s.Marudhar Plywoods accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 for having received the said part of the loan amount. In this regard, even though the accused No.1 has not collected the invoice from the M/s.Marudhar Plywoods and has released the said loan amount to the extent of 64.25% keeping the margin amount, it cannot be said to be an illegal one.
53. On perusal of the Ex.P.54 containing the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount at Ex.P.54(a) and 54(e), accompanied by the Invoices of Nathan's Vet Pharma Centre at Ex.P.54(c) and (d) and Invoices dated 8.12.2007, 19.12.2007, 18.12.2007, 14.12.2007, 15.12.2007, 5.2.2008, 27.2.2008 and 7.3.2008 accompanied by the receipts issued by the Accused No.2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 102 at Ex.P.54(b) and 4 receipts dated 6.8.2007. On perusal of the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the loan amount at Ex.P.54(a) and (e), there is an endorsement & order by the accused No.1 to release the said amount keeping the margin amount. Here also the accused No.1 has maintained the margin amount for release of the part of the loan amount in favour of accused No.2.
54. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.55 to 61, the requisitions made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount at Ex.P.55, P56, P57, P58, P59, P60, P61 accompanied by the Delivery Challan/Invoice of Himalaya Trading Company at Ex.P.55(c) to (f), 56(c), 57(c) to (e), 58(b), 59(b), 60(b), 61(b) accompanied by the receipts issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.55(b), 56(b), 57(b), 58(a), 59(a), 60(a), 61(a). On perusal of the Ex.P.55(a), 56(a), 57(a), the endorsement made by the accused No.1, it goes to show that he has maintained the margin amount at the time of the release of the said part of the loan amount to the accused No.2.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 103
55. On perusal of the Ex.P.62 to 72, containing the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount, the Invoice issued by the M/s.Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd., at Ex.P.62(c) to
(e), P63(b), P64(b), P65(b), P67(b) & (c), P68(b) and (c), P69(b) and (c), P70(b), P72(b), accompanied by the receipts issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.62(b), 63(a), 64(a), 65(a), 66(a), 67(a), 68(a), 69(a), 70(a). On perusal of the Ex.P.62(a), P63 to P69, there is an endorsement & order by the accused No.1 for release of the said amount maintaining the margin amount.
56. On perusal of the Ex.P.73, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount, accompanied by the Tax Invoice of M/s. Kavi Agencies at Ex.P.73(b) & (c) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2. On perusal of the Ex.P.72(d), there is an endorsement & order by the accused No.1 for release of the said part of the loan amount maintaining the margin amount.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 104
57. On perusal of Ex.P.74, containing the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the cash/credit bill of Udaya Agencies at Ex.P.74(b) and (c) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2. On perusal of the Ex.P.74(d), there is an endorsement by the accused No.1 for release of the said part of the loan amount subject to maintaining the margin amount.
58. On perusal of the Ex.P.75, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Sales Invoice of M/s.Minerva Pharma Distributors at Ex.P.75(b), accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.75(a). On perusal of the Ex.P.75(c), there is an endorsement & order by the accused No.2 directing Mr. Abraham to release the said part of the loan amount maintaining margin amount at 35.75%.
59. On perusal of the Ex.P.76, the requisition made by the accused No.2 or release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Delivery Challan/ Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 105 Invoice issued by the M/s.B.V. Feed Supplements Manufacturing Company Limited at Ex.P.76(b) and (c) accompanied by the receipt at Ex.P.76(a) issued by the accused No.2 for having received the part of the loan amount. On perusal of Ex.P.76, the requisition slip goes to show that accused No.1 has released 64.25% of the said requisite part of the loan amount, thereby he has maintained the margin amount at 35.75%.
60. On perusal of Ex.P.77, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the sales Invoice issued by the M/s.Tetragon Chemie Pvt., Ltd., at Ex.P.77(b) and (c) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.77(a). On perusal of the Ex.P.77, it goes to show that accused No.1 has released only 64.25% of the said requisite part of the loan amount by maintaining margin at 35.75%.
61. On perusal of the Ex.P.78, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Invoice issued by the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 106 M/s.Akshaya Multimin Pvt. Ltd., at Ex.P.78(b) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.78(a). On perusal of the Ex.P.78, it goes to show that the accused No.1 has maintained the margin amount at the time of release of the said part of the loan amount as per the demand made by the accused No.2.
62. On perusal of the Ex.P.79, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the tax invoice issued by the M/s.Varsha Labs at Ex.P.79(b) to (d) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 go to show that accused No.1 has maintained the margin amount at the time of release of the part of the loan amount as per the demand made by the accused No.2.
63. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.80, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Invoice issued by the M/s.Tetragon Chemie Pvt., Ltd., at Ex.P.80(b) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.80(a) go to show that accused No.1 has Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 107 maintained the margin amount at the time of release of the part of the loan amount as per the demand made by the accused No.2.
64. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.81, the requisition made by the accused No.2 for release of the part of the loan amount accompanied by the Invoice issued by the M/s.B.V. Feed Supplements Manufacturing Company Ltd., at Ex.P.81(b) accompanied by the receipt issued by the accused No.2 at Ex.P.81(a) go to show that accused No.1 has maintained the margin amount at the time of release of the part of the loan amount as per the demand made by the accused No.2.
65. Ongoing through above referred facts in respect not collecting of proper Invoice by the Accused no.1, whether it cannot be considered as intentional one or it is negligent act of the Accused No.1. In this regard admittedly said parties have acknowledged the receipt of cheque amount for having supplied materials to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Therefore even if proper invoices were not collected, it has not caused any loss to any Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 108 parties. It appears that Accused No.1 being chief Manger of the Bank in enhancing the business of the Bank might have taken more risk in doing so.
66. In this regard I would like to lay my hands discussion made in judgment reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 941 in S.V.L. Murthy Vs STATE represented by CBI Hyderabad wherein their Lordships have discussed in pare 46, "It may be that there had been certain procedural irregularities in the transaction. However, sufficient evidence is available on record to show that the officers had done so for the purpose of promoting the business of the Bank in relation whereto or in respect whereof, initiatives had been taken by PWs 19 and 20." Further, as per the observations made in the ruling reported 1996 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 1205 = (1996) 10 Supreme Court Cases 193 in the case of C. Chenga Reddy and others vs. State of A.P., wherein their Lordships have held as under: -
"Though the prosecution has established that the appellants have committed not only codal violations but also irregularities by ignoring various circulars and departmental orders issued from time to time in the matter of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 109 allotment of work of jungle clearance on nomination basis and have committed departmental lapse yet no dishonest intention on their part could be shown and none of the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution could be construed as incriminating or were of any conclusive nature and all the circumstances put together do not lead to the irresistible conclusion that the said circumstances put together do not lead to the irresistible guilt of the appellants and wholly incompatible with their innocence. That because of the actions of the appellants in breach of codal provisions, instructions and procedural safeguards, the State may have suffered financially, particularly by allotment of work on nomination basis without inviting tenders, but those acts of omission and commission by themselves do not establish the commission of criminal offences alleged against them. These acts of omission and commission do give rise to a strong suspicion that the appellants so acted with a view to misappropriate government funds but suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof. The courts below appear to have drawn inferences by placing the burden of proving innocence on the appellants which is an impermissible course. None of the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution against the appellants can be said to have been proved satisfactorily and all those circumstances, which are not of any clinching nature, even if held to be proved do not complete the chain of evidence so complete as to lead to an irresistible conclusion consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the appellant and wholly inconsistent with his innocence. The prosecution has not established the case Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 110 against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt."
Therefore, in view of the above observations, if the same principle is applied to present case on hand, it appears that the accused No.1 had taken utmost interest in enhancing the business transaction of the bank. Therefore, in doing so, he might have done some minor irregularities or deviated from the regular procedures of the bank without causing any loss to the Bank. Further, it is also brought to the notice of this court by the learned advocate for accused No.1 that the accused No.1 is a very good officer and he has got appreciation many times from his higher officers in respect of the enhancement and good management of the banking transactions. In this regard, the learned advocate for accused No.1 has produced some copies of the document to show that accused No.1 has got appreciating letters from higher officers. In this regard, even though the said fact is not relevant to the facts of the case, but in order to appreciate the conduct and behaviour of the accused Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 111 No.1, I would like to narrate the summary of the said documents:
(i) The letter dated 7.6.2004 issued by Sri. K. Jayakar Shetty, General Manager (Personnel) Vijaya Bank, Head Office, in favour of the accused No.1 Shri. Shama Shetty while the accused No.1 was while serving as Senior Manager, Navarangapur Branch, Ahmedabad captioned as "Business performance of your branch for the financial year 2003-2004" wherein the said General Manager has expressed his happiness which I would like to reproduce as under:
"I am glad to note that while evaluating the business performance of the branches vis-à-vis the targets under various parameters during the financial year 2003-2004, your branch has been evaluated as one of the top ten performer branches on all India basis."
(ii) The letter dated 27.5.2004 issued by the Assistant General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Planning & Development Department, in Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 112 favour of the Senior/Branch Manager, Ahmedabad captioned as "Best Performing Branch". During the said period, the accused No.1 was serving as the Senior Manager of the said branch.
(iii) The letter dated 4.1.2010 issued by the Asst.
General Manager of Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Mysore in favour of the accused No.1 while he was working as Branch head of MUDA Branch. The said letter captioned as "ACHIEVEMENTS OF TARGETS-DECEMBER 2009" wherein the said letter reads as under: -
"We are pleased to note that your branch has surpassed the target under Aggregate Deposits as on 31st Dec. 2009.
We acknowledge the good performance of your branch / contribution to the business growth of the Region/ Bank, and congratulate you and your team for the achievement."
(iv) The letter issued by B. Prakashchandra Shetty, General Manager Planning, Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Dept., of Planning & Development dated Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 113 2.9.2009 addressed to Sri. Shama Shetty, Accused No.1, while he was working as Chief Manager of MUDA branch regarding branch performance. In the said letter, in para-1 it reads as under: -
"We are happy to note your branch has consistently improved the SB deposits from Rs.17 crore (March 09) to Rs.26.5 crore as on date. Keep up this good work and contribute richly to our corporate goal of crossing Rs. 10000 crore under SB deposits by Sept. 09.
(v) The Letter dated 7.10.2009 issued by the Assistant General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Mysore addressed to accused No.1 while he was working as Chief Manager, MUDA branch, Mysore wherein it reads as under:
-
"I am happy to note that your branch has achieved and surpassed Deposits target for the quarter ending Sept. 2009. The considerable increase in deposit contributed towards improving that Total Deposit of the Region. I appreciate the initiate taken by you and your team of staff to contribute towards substantial increase in deposit of your branch during the quarter ending Sept. 2009. ......"
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 114
(vi) The letter dated 24.11.2003 issued by T. Diwakar Hegde, Deputy General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Ahmedabad addressed to the accused No.1 Shri. Shama Shetty which reads as under: -
"With the wholehearted support, commitment and contribution from you and the team led by you, our Bank achieved a distinct milestone by garnering over 17 times subscription in the follow-on public issue."
(vii) The letter dated 6.4.2004 issued by T. Diwakar Hegde, Deputy General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Ahmedabad addressed to accused No.1 recited as YOUR PERFORMANCE FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2004 which reads as under:
-
"I am glad to note that your branch has surpassed both, deposit as will as advance, targets for the year 2003-2004. I congratulate you and your team for this success.
I am confident that the same tempo will be maintained during the current financial year also."
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 115
(viii) The letter dated 18.8.2003 issued by T. Diwakar Hegde, Deputy General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Ahmedabad addressed to accused No.1 which reads as under: -
"I am glad to note that you have already cross the deposits and advances targets fixed for September 2003. I am sure you will continue the good work and reach the March 2004 target sby September 2003."
(ix) The letter dated 12.4.2000 issued by Regional Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Udupi addressed to accused No.1 while he was working as a Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Brahmavar recited as ACHIEVEMENT OF YEARLY TARGET - MARCH 2000, which reads as under: -
"I am happy to note that your branch has achieved, deposit figures of Rs.9.07 crores against the target of Rs.8.75 fixed for March 2000."
(x) The letter dated 10.4.1999 issued by Regional Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Udupi addressed to accused No.1 while he was working as a Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Brahmavar Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 116 recited as ACHIEVEMENT OF YEARLY TARGET - MARCH 1999, which reads as under: -
"I am happy to note that your branch has achieved the deposit figure of Rs.7.37 Crores against the target of Rs.7.25 Crores fixed for March 1999."
(xi) The letter dated 4.6.1997 issued by Sri. A.K. Rai, Regional Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional office, Udupi addressed to accused No.1 while he was working as a Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Brahmavar recited as "Our performance and expectations", which reads as under: -
"First of all I extend my sincere thanks for you and your staff members in enabling this region in achieving fairly good performance in important parameters as detailed below during the year 1996-97. ........."
(xii) Merit Certificate dated 5.1.2005 issued by Sri. M.S. Kapur, Chairman & Managing Director certifying that Shri Shama Shetty (3282) Navrangpura Branch, Ahmedabad Region has participated in the Special Campaign for Mobilisation of Savings Bank Deposits 2003- Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 117 2004 and has canvassed Savings Bank Deposits of Rs.1632276/-.
(xiii) Merit Certificate dated 5.1.2005 issued by Sri. T. Diwakar Hegde, Deputy General Manager certifying that Shri Shama Shetty (3282) Navrangpura Branch, Ahmedabad Region has participated in the Special Campaign for Mobilisation of Current Deposits 2003-2004 and has canvassed Current Deposits of Rs.317962/-.
(xiv) Merit Certificate dated 9.10.2001 issued by Regional Head certifying that Shri Shama Shetty (3282) of Brahmavar Branch, has participated in the Special Loan Recovery Motivation Scheme 1999-2000 and has recovered an amount of Rs.45390/-.
(xv) Merit Certificate dated 16.03.1999 issued by Chairman & Managing Director, Vijaya Bank Head Office, Bengaluru certifying that Shri Shama Shetty (3282) of Brahmavar Branch, has participated in the Special campaign for Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 118 Mobilising Deposits 1997-98 and has canvassed Vijayashree Units Deposits of Rs.7,29,500/-. (xvi) Merit Certificate dated 9.2.1998 issued by Chairman & Managing Director, Vijaya Bank Head Office, Bengaluru certifying that Shri Shama Shetty (3282) of Brahmavar Branch, has participated in the Special campaign for Mobilising Deposits 1996-97 and has canvassed Vijayashree a total sum of Rs.12,84,055/- (Fixed Deposit Rs.12,34,055/- and Savings Bank Rs.50,000/-).
(xvii) Merit Certificate dated 31.12.1997 issued by Regional Head certifying that Shri Shama Shetty Code No.3282 of Brahmavar Branch, has participated in Deposit Mobilisation Scheme of 96-97 and has mobilized Rupees Twelve lakhs eighty four thousand fifty five only.
67. In view of the above said documents, it goes to show that the accused No.1, since 1997 has shown his Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 119 enthusiasm, progress and interest in enhancement of the savings deposits, current deposits, loan lending and recovery of the loan of Vijaya Bank. Further, it can also be gathered from the said documents that even after the transfer of the accused No.1 from the Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru to Mysuru during 2008 he has continued to perform at his level best. The said documents further reveal that even during 2010, he has continued the same position and same performance with the said bank. Therefore, keeping in view the above appreciation letters, certificate of merits of the accused No.1, it goes to show that accused No.1 has rendered best of his service to the Vijaya Bank. Normally, a person who intends to get the work from the others not only be strict in extracting the work in accordance with law, but at the same time he should also be lenient, genres, for some times to the some persons in order to get work from them, even ignoring some minor aspects and procedure of practice and regulations. Therefore, it goes to show that in the present case on hand, even though accused No.1 has not Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 120 collected the valid invoices, the valid receipts, but he has collected the proforma invoices and released the loan amount through cheque to the said suppliers without causing any loss to the Bank. Here, at the cost of repetition I once again repeat that even though the accused No.1 was lenient in ignoring the procedure of collecting the proper invoice, but when he has released the said part of the loan through cheque, it cannot be said that he was totally negligent and has shown malafideness in release of the said loan.
68. On perusal of the Ex.P.37, the Scrutiny Report dated 17.1.2007 submitted by the Sri.Ramesh Kumar.K., Panel Advocate accompanied by the evidence of the PW.22 - Ramesh Kumar K, it can be seen that as per the evidence and the scrutiny report, he has scrutinized the title deeds of the said property submitted by the accused No.2 as a security, the said report also shows that he has verified the RTC extract of Sy. No.39 from 1965 to 2005 of property bearing Sy. No.39 and Sy. No. 43, the said report also speaks that the said properties mortgaged by Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 121 the accused No.2 in favour of the Vijaya Bank were in order.
69. Now I will discuss about construction of only 4 sheds and part construction of 5 sheds, in this regard, admittedly the accused No.1 has served in the said bank till he transferred on 13.2.2008, till then he has released Rs.255.90 lakhs loan to the accused No.2. In other words, he has not released the entire loan amount. Admittedly, the accused No. 2 has started his business during March 2008. In other words, he was constructing his poultry farm sheds. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 was negligent in not supervising development and construction of the shed belongs to the accused No.2. Further, admittedly the PW17 Seetharama Shetty, the successor of the accused No.1 has also released about Rs.54 lakhs, the remaining part of the loan amount to the accused No.2. PW17 has admitted that he has also inspected the site of the accused No.2 and as he has received pressure from his higher officers he has released the remaining part of the loan to the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 122 accused No.2. PW5 has also endorsed that the said loan was sanctioned in accordance with law. Therefore, on going through the entire evidence on record, even though the accused No.2 has constructed only four sheds and part construction of the five sheds, the accused No.1 cannot be blamed and he cannot said to be responsible for having shown negligence in supervising and controlling the best utilization of the said loan by the accused No.2. Further, admittedly at the cost of repetition, the accused No.2 has started poultry business during March 2008. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the accused No.1 was not negligent or disown his diligence in discharge of his duty in accordance with law.
70. Further, it is also alleged by the prosecution that accused No.1 has sanctioned cash credit miscellaneous loan of Rs. Ten lakhs to the accused No.2 and Rs. Two lakhs for vehicle loan in favour of the accused No.2 during November 2006 and March 2007. In this regard, admittedly the said loans were sanctioned Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 123 by the accused No.1 much prior to the proposal and sanction of the present loan on hand. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has conspired with the accused No.2 in sanction and disbursal of the said loans of Rs. Ten lakhs and Rs. Two lakhs in favour of accused No.2. Admittedly the said transactions are different from present loan transaction. Further, there are no any allegations or documents to show that the accused No.1 has shown his negligence in sanction and of the said loans.
71. So also on perusal of the Ex.P.38, the Estimate for construction of the 6 Nos. of Grover Shed in the proposed Poultry Farm in the land belonging to M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm dated 24.2.2007 issued by the H.S. Nagaraj, accompanied by his evidence as PW.29 goes to show that he has valued the estimated construction of the sheds at Rs.2,55,85,805/-. Further, the same H.S. Nagaraj, Consulting Engineer has also given his valuation report of the property (Agricultural land with building) building to Sri. Rajanna and Sri. R. Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 124 Pavan & Sri. R. Ullas as per Ex.P.135 dated 22.1.2007. On reading the evidence of PW.29, H.S. Nagaraj read with the Ex.P.135, he has valued the landed property and also agricultural land including the building at Sy. No.39 and 43 goes to show that the total value is Rs.4,33,97,500/-. The said report also accompanied by the sketch of the said project, photographs of the said project. Therefore, as per the said report, as on 22.1.2007, the accused No.2 has constructed the buildings in the said property to the tune of Rs.4,33,97,500/-. Therefore, it goes to show that all the materials purchased by the accused No.2 as referred in the above said paragraphs are being used for construction of the building required for the poultry project. Further, the said valuation of Rs.4,33,97,500/- also fortify the fact that there is no any misutilisation of the said materials by the accused No.2 or in other words, it fortify the fact that the said amount released by the accused No.1 by maintaining the margin amount is used for the said project itself.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 125
72. Further, as per Ex.P.154, the valuation report submitted by the M/s.Manu Associates i.e.P.W.20 Sri. C. Manohar, registered Engineer and Approved Valuer dated 25.4.2007 coupled with the report of P.W.18. Sri. R.S.D.B. Gowda a Post Graduate in Agriculture in specialization in Soil Science and having experience of served as Agriculture Officer cum Manager & Senior Manager, in Canara Bank for about 22 years has submitted his report as per Ex.P.152 as on 30.3.2008 in respect of the valuation of the property lying with the Sai Poultry Breeding Farm goes to show that as on the date of reporting the total cost of the land, building and unfinished building, machinery was worth Rs.4,45,02,100/-. Further, as per the Inspection Report at Ex.P.138 dated 19.2.2008, and Ex.P.139 dated 12.3.2008 submitted by P.W.17 goes to show that the said unit has started production and it also discloses that as per Ex.P.138 work of the two sheds have been completed, 40 workers were working in the unit. The poultry has already purchased 1st batch of chicks and Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 126 was kept at the rearing shed taken on rental basis. Further, as per Ex.P.139 dated 12.3.2008, it is reported that the first batch of the four shed works completed and other 5 sheds work is in full progress and it is completed up to 75%. The workers are fully engaged in different types of work like welding of wire mesh, erection of slat system to the finished shed, tissing work, putting asbestos sheets to the roof of the shed. The two reports submitted by the P.W.17 Sri. Seetharama Shetty, Senior Branch Manager of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, the successor of the accused No.1 immediately after transfer of accused No.1, the above said reports are as per Ex.P.138 dt. 19.2.2008 and Ex.P139 dt. 12.3.2008. Further, P.W.29 Sri. H.S. Nagaraj, the panel valuer of the Vijaya Bank who has submitted the reports as per Ex.P.16, Ex.P.38, Ex.P.135, Ex.P.136, Ex.P.153, Ex.P.166 has deposed before this court and admitted during the course of the cross-examination at page No.7, para-3 that Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 127 "I have mentioned that the total amount spent for construction including material at site is Rs.3,51,82,500/- and in Ex.P16, have also mentioned that 20000 birds were there and the cost of the birds was nearly Rs.80 lakhs and including the valuation of the birds, the total amount will be Rs.4,31,82,500/-." Further, admittedly accused No.1 during his tenure in the said bank from 25.8.2007 to 13.2.2008 has released an amount of Rs.255.90 lakhs to the accused No.2 in respect of the said loan. Further, the P.W.17 Sri.Seetharama Shetty, the Senior Manager and successor of the accused No.1 who is examined as PW17 has admitted that he has released Rs.54 lakhs out of the loan sanctioned to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Further, PW.17 during the examination-in-chief itself at page No.3 in para-8 has deposed that "The Regional Office told that I have to release the amount and I have to see the progress at the work done at the spot and it is my duty and I should not refuse to release the loan amount and if necessary I have to take the help of the panel valuer. I took the valuation report from one Sri H.S. Nagaraj, panel valuer dated March 2008 regarding the progress of the work and materials dumped at the site and stored. The said panel valuer estimated expenditure of the future work of the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 128 project and it was sent to the Regional Office. On the instruction of the Regional Office, I started to release the loan in the interest of the Bank and not to allow the account to become bad."
Further, as per the Ex.D1, the letter written by the General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Bengaluru addressed to the General Manager, Credit Priority Department, H.O. Bengaluru dated 23.5.2008 requesting for the enhancement in the term loan sanctioned to Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm has stated that:
"It is reported that 60% of the work has already been completed as per the original estimation and about 18,000 birds have been started production. Party is ahead of work schedule as per the original estimation."
Therefore, on going through the said reports and the valuations made by the said authorities and the evidence on record, it goes to show that the loan amount released by the accused No.1 in favour of accused No.2 has been properly utilised. More particularly as per the evidence of PW.17 referred above, the Senior Manager, successor of the accused No.1 has specifically deposed that even the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 129 Regional Office has directed him to release the further loan amount. Therefore, it also goes to show that even the officer at Regional office has also satisfied about the proper use of the said loan amount released in favour of the accused No.2. Further it also goes to show that act of Accusedno.1 in realizing loan in favour of Accused no.2 is fortified and confirmed by regional office. Hence, in view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that accused No.1 has not shown any negligence or recklessness in releasing the said loan in favour of accused No.2 till he got transferred from the said bank.
73. Further, on perusal of the Ex.P.16, one more Progress Report of the Poultry sheds, grower sheds and staff quarters etc., in the land belonging to the M/s. Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm issued by the same witness PW.29. H.S. Nagaraj dated 12.2.2008 also goes to show that the total materials lying at site at column No.5 amounts to Rs.3,51,82,500/- and he has made specific observation that total amount spent for construction including materials at site is Rs.3,51,82,500/-. The said Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 130 progress report also contains the photographs showing the building constructed in the site, the materials such as cement sheets, fencing wire, iron rods, poultry equipments, cement bricks, birds, food grains etc. Therefore, ongoing through the said report of the P.W.29. H.S. Nagaraj, it goes to show that as on 12.3.2008, the property lying at the site of the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm is more than the amount of loan already released by the Vijaya Bank. Admittedly, the accused No.1 has been transferred from the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch on 13.2.2008. In other words, immediately after a month of his transfer, the said report as per Ex.P.16 has been submitted shows excess of the property than the loan released in favour of the accused No.2 were lying in his factory.
74. This goes to show that there is no conspiracy between the accused No.1 and 2 even at the time of release of the said loan by the accused No.1 in favour of the accused No.2. On the contrary, it fortify the fact that accused No.1 after following the due procedure, after Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 131 visiting the spot, submitting the inspection report to the Regional Officer, after getting the valuation reports, has tried to maintain the margin amount and after verifying all the documents with due diligence and bonafidely has released the said loan amount during the discharge of his duty in accordance with procedure laid by bank as per sanction order. Further accused no.1 cannot made be held for non payment of loan installments by the accused no.2,because addimetly repayment of loan starts from june 2009(as per the sanction terms & condition letter atD-23(4)),i.e.after transfer of Accused no.1 from the said Branch.
75. Further the prosecution has alleged that at the time of the search by the Investigating Officer, they have found copy of the borrowers' credit evaluation report dated 8.3.2007 and risk rate scoring sheet dated 28.3.2007 in the residential premises of the accused No.1. Further, it is also the case of the prosecution that the said documents are confidential official documents which should not be handed over to a private person Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 132 other than the bank officials. Therefore, it is the specific case of the prosecution that accused No.1 being the Senior Manager of the said bank has conspired and colluded with the accused No.2 and has handed over the copy of the said official confidential documents to the accused No.2.
76. In this regard, even though the prosecution has made serious allegation surprisingly, on perusal of the seizure list, it does not contain the said confidential documents said to have been seized from the residential premises of the accused No.1. Further, even the prosecution has also not lead any evidence through the PW.64. Investigating Officer to that effect or got marked the said document. In other words, in fact there is no any iota of evidence to show that the Investigating Officer has seized the copy of the said official confidential documents from the residential premises of the accused No.1. Further, at this stage even if we consider that the said documents have been seized from the residential premises of the accused No.1, when he had made search, Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 133 at that time, the original of the said documents have already been submitted to the Regional Office and loan was already sanctioned in favour of the accused No.1 by the Regional Office. Therefore, even if we consider copy of the such documents were found in the residential premises of the accused No.1, they cannot be considered as a confidential documents, because once the loan has been sanctioned, the confidentiality of such document looses its identity. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused to the effect that the accused No.1 in pursuance of the said conspiracy has handed over the copy of the said official confidential document to the accused No.2 as alleged.
77. Further, it is also allegation of the prosecution that the accused No.1 has received illegal gratification and has misused his power as a public servant along with the accused No.2 and caused loss to the bank. In this regard, before discussing the illegal gratification Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 134 alleged to have been received by the accused No.1, I would like to reproduce the judgment relied upon by the learned advocate for accused No.1 reported in 2016 Legal Eagle (SC) 351 Supreme Court of India: 2016 AIOL 3351: 2016 Legal Eagle (SC) 351 in A. Shivaprakash vs. State of Kerala, wherein it is held as under: -
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 409, 468, 471 & 34 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 -
Sections 13(2) & 13(1)(d) - Appeal against conviction - Criminal misconduct by public servant - No evidence lead by prosecution as to what kind of pecuniary advantage was obtained by the appellant - Prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt - Appeal allowed - Conviction set aside.
78. In view of the above judgment, the prosecution has to prove that accused No.1 has received any pecuniary advantage or any gratification other than the pecuniary advantage from the accused No.2 or from any other person in connection with the said loan transaction. In this regard there is no any direct evidence or materials collected by the prosecution to show that accused No.1 has received any illegal Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 135 gratification from the accused No.2 in respect of the release of the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the prosecution has to prove specifically with cogent, convincing, corroborative evidence to the effect that accused No.1 has received any illegal gratification or any favour for releasing the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. In order to prove receipt of illegal gratification, the prosecution has examined PW.62 the younger brother of the accused No.1 Sri. N. Krishnamurthy, the said witness has s deposed before the court that "I am the younger brother of accused No.1 who is present before court. Accused No.1 who served in many branches of Vijaya Bank was transferred and posted to Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka Branch during 2007. Accused No.1 purchased one site which was at that time he asked me for some financial help and myself and my wife together gave a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- to him for purchase of the site. I contributed Rs.4,50,000/- and my wife contributed Rs.2,50,000/- and paid the amount to accused No.1 through cheque." Further, the said witness has also produced the statement of account at Ex.P.448 and the entries for Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 136 having en-cashed the said cheques on 21.4.2007 of Rs.5,00,000/- and on 24.4.2007 of Rs.2,00,000/- at Ex.P.448(b) and (c) have been shown. Therefore, except this witness, the prosecution has not lead any evidence to show that the accused No.1 has received any illegal gratification. Even on going through the evidence of PW.62, in fact he has lend a loan of Rs.7 lakhs to the accused No.1 for purchase of the site allotted to accused No.1 from the Vijay Bank Employees Housing Society. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has purchased the said sites illegally. Further, in fact the said loan has been lent by the PW.62 by way of cheque. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove that accused No.1 has received illegal gratification for having released the said loan in favour of accused No.2. Therefore, the prosecution utterly failed to prove the charges against the accused No.1 that he has committed offence punishable u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as alleged.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 137
79. It is also case of the prosecution that accused No.2 along with his wife have availed the loan of Rs.30 lakhs each from the Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch, Bengaluru by creating charge on the property of Sy. No. 39 and 43. The said properties were already mortgaged in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch in respect of the present loan under issue. PW.50, the then Senior Manager of the Bank of India for the period November 2011 to May 2013 has deposed before the court that in the year 2009, the wife of the accused Smt. N.R. Sarvamangala, Proprietor of Sri Sai Tej Poultry Enterprises availed a demand loan of Rs.30 lakhs. Further, he has deposed that the accused No.2 Rajanna was also having Current Account with their bank, he has borrowed loan of Rs.30 lakhs as a Proprietor of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. In this regard, they have mortgaged the property in respect of Sy. No.39 and 43 which were already mortgaged in favour of Vijaya Bank. Further, PW.42, Sri. Hanumantharaya Ramanna Havaldar, who worked as a Headquarter Sub-Registrar, Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 138 Yalahanka Sub-Registrar office, Bengaluru from 19.5.2006 to 14.2.2007 has deposed that Partition Deed dated 5.12.2006 registered on 8.12.2006 as per Ex.P.211 was registered by him. Further, in para-8 and 9 of his deposition he deposed that:
"8. Now I see another partition deed said to have been registered on 8.12.2006 between Galappa, Naranappa and T. Rajanna but it is fake and created document and it does not bear my signatures and somebody has tried to forge my signatures in the same and for identification purpose said partition deed is marked as Ex.P.213 (9 sheets). On the same day between the same parties a partition deed has been registered which is already marked as Ex.P.211. The contents of Ex.P.211 and Ex.P.213 are not identical and there is some difference in them. In Ex.P.213, I have not signed for having registered Ex.P.213 in Sub- Registrar Office, Yalahanka. Generally, I was using black ink to put my signatures in the documents registered by me and in respect of correspondence letters I was using green ink to put my signatures. The seal put in Ex.P.213 does not tally with the name of Sub-registrar mentioned in the same. The photos of the executors found in Ex.P.213 are not the photos of the persons mentioned in Ex.P.213 (executors) and their correct photos are found in Ex.P.211 as the executors of Ex.P.211 or the executors named in Ex.P.213 also.
9. In page no.6 of Ex.P.211 there are correction signed by the executors of Ex.P.211 but the corrections found in page no.6 of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 139 Ex.P.213 are not signed by the executors. The properties fallen to the share of the executors mentioned in Ex.P.211 is different from the properties fallen to the share of executors mentioned in Ex.P.213."
Further, PW.55 Sri.D.G. Appaiahanna S/o Galappa who is the nephew of the accused No.2 has deposed before the court in para-4 of his deposition as under:
"Now I see the Ex.P.213 - partition deed dated 5/12/2006 (it is another document). Now I see the photos of Galappa and Narayanappa in this partition deed. The said photos are not the phots of Galappa and Narayanappa."
Further, PW.56 is the father of the PW.55 i.e., Sri.Galappa is the elder brother of the accused No.2 has deposed in para-6 of his deposition as under:
"Now I see the Ex.P.213 registered partition dated 5.12.2006. Now I see the photo in the said partition deed, it is not my photo. I newer went to the Sub-Registrar office, Yelahanka to sign the said document. The signature appears in the said partition deed is not my signature."
Further, PW.63 Sri.Pharshy Venugopala Rao, Scientis B CFSL, Hyderabad has deposed that he is having experience of 25 years in the field of examination of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 140 documents, initially he underwent job training in the field of examination of documents from the office of the Government Examiner Quastioned Documents at Shimla has deposed that the DIG/Head of Branch, CBI/ACB, Bengaluru, has forwarded the documents to the Director of CFSL, Hyderabad for examination and opinion and accordingly he has examined the said documents including Ex.P213 and given his report. Therefore, it is the specific case of the prosecution that accused No.2 has misrepresented and has cheated, and produced the documents falsely claiming them to be true and forged the document and has committed an offence punishable u/s 467 and 471 of IPC. In this regard, admittedly the Kempegowda Nagar Police Station have already registered a FIR against the accused No.2 and his wife Smt.Sarvamangala in respect of the same facts on the basis of the complaint lodged by the Manual Chief Manager, Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch, Bengaluru. Further, it is alleged that the accused No.2 has not brought to the notice of the Bank of India and Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 141 suppressed the fact that he has already mortgaged the said properties in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru. Accordingly After due investigation, the said police have filed the charge sheet against the accused No.2 and his wife Smt. S.R. Sarvamangala on 12.7.2014 for the offence punishable u/s 120(B), 420, 463, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC. This fact has been brought to notice of this court only at the time of arguments by the Advocate for the Accused.no.2.
80. Further, as per the Article 20 of the Constitution which reads as under: -
ARTICLE 20. Protection in respect of conviction for offences: - (1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of he offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. (3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Further, Sec. 300 of Cr.P.C., reads as under: -
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 142
300. Person once convicted or acquitted not to be tried for same offence: - (1) A person who has once been tried by a Court of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall, while such conviction or acquittal remains in force, not be liable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have been made under sub-
section (1) of Section 221, or for which he might have been convicted under sub-section (2) thereof.
Therefore, on going through the above provisions of law, admittedly when the Kempegowda Nagar Police have already filed charge sheet against the accused No.2 and his wife Smt. Sarvamangala for having cheated and misused and played fraud against the said Bank, this court cannot once again try for the same offence on the same cause of action. Admittedly, even though this is the former and prior charge sheet than the charge sheet filed by the Kempegowda Nagar Police against the accused No.2. Admittedly, in respect of the creating charge on the same property is done by accused No.2 and his wife while taking loan from the Bank of India. Therefore, in the present case on hand, the wife of the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 143 accused No.2 has not been charge sheeted. In view of the said fact, I am of the considered opinion that it is not necessary and does not warrant to appreciate any evidence against the accused No.2 for having cheated and forged and falsely represented the documents to the Bank of India, Vishweshwarpuram Branch. Further, admittedly when the Kempegowda Nagar Police have already filed the charge sheet against the accused No.2 and his wife, this court gives liberty to the XXIV ACMM Court, Bengaluru to try the said offence in accordance with law. Further, in order to avoid the legal complication, I am of the considered opinion that this court cannot take into consideration, the evidence already lead against accused No.2 for having created charge against the accused No.2 in respect of the same properties which are already mortgaged in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahan.ka Branch were once again mortgaged in favour of Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch. Admittedly Accused no.1 is not a party to the said loan transaction raised from Bank of India. Further Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 144 admittedly said loan was raised by the Accused no.2 and his wife on14-12-2008 i.e. after Accused no.1 transferred from Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch. Therefore it cannot be said that Accused no.1 is involved in commission of the said offence. As such Accused no.1 entitled for acquittal for offence punishable u/s 467 &471 of I.P.C. Further, it is answer as 'No opinion is given' in respect of the charge against the accused No.2 for the offence punishable under Sec. 467 and 471 of IPC.
81. Further, it is the specific allegation of the prosecution that accused No.2 has cheated the Vijaya Bank by mortgaging the same property which was already mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Further A2 has intentionally in order to deceive the Vijaya Bank has not repaid said loan amount to Vijay bank. Further he has diverted his income from poultry form for other than repayment loan amount thereby he has cheated the Bank.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 145
82. Therefore, at this stage, I would like to reproduce Sec. 415 & 420 of IPC.
415. Cheating: - Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to 'cheat'.
Explanation: - A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.
Sec. 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property: - Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Therefore, the ingredients of cheating are as under: -
(1) Deception of any person.
(2) (a) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person
(i) to deliver any property to any person; or
(ii) to consent that any person shall retain any property; or Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 146
(b) intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property.
83. Further,on this point the learned advocate for the accused No.1 relied upon the following ruling 2009(2) Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 941 in S.V.L. Murthy vs. State by CBI, Hyderabad and other related parties in respect of the cheating which I would like to reproduce as under: -
A. Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 415, 420, 405, 409 and 120-B - Cheating - Ingredients - Existence of an intention to cheat at the time of making initial promise or formation of contract - Importance of and need to prove - Held, complainant is required to show that accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation - In the absence of culpable intention at the time of making initial promise, no offence is made out under S. 420.
84. Therefore, in view of the above rulings and provision of law, in order to prove the offence of cheating, the prosecution has to prove the malafide & fraudulent Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 147 intention of the accused for the commission of the said offence.
85. In this regard PW.54, the Manager of the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch has specifically deposed before the court that the accused No.2 obtained a loan of Rs.4,90,000/- from their bank by mortgaging Sy. No.39 and 43 to the extent of 9 acres 17 guntas. Further, he has also deposed that the accused No.2 has confirmed the said loan by confirmation letter dated 10.2.2006 as per Ex.P.402(c) and as such as on 10.6.2006, the accused No.2 was due an amount of Rs.6,37,320/-. In this regard, the accused No.2 has not denied obtaining loan from the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch. It is specific defence of the accused No.2 that before 2003, there was no partition in the family of the accused No.2. Now after partition, he has mortgaged his share of the property to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru. Further, it is also specific case of the accused No.2 that the boundaries shown in the said Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 148 mortgage deed mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch are different and the boundary shown in the property mortgaged in favour of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch is different. Further, he wants to claim that the properties mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch and Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch are different. In this regard, on perusal of Ex.P.402, entire file, the said Manager of the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch has produced the true copy of the Registered Mortgage Deed executed by the Accused No.2 on 13.6.2003 goes to show that the property in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch is Sy. No.39 measuring 4 acres 18 guntas and Sy. No.43 measuring 4 acres 39 guntas. The boundaries of the said properties have been shown to as to the east Property of Munirayappa, to the west Property of Galappa, Kondappa Shetty, to the north property of Chinnagappa & Mariyappa and to the south Govt. land.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 149 Admittedly, the accused No.2 has mortgaged the property with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru as per Ex.P.3 property bearing Sy. No.39 and 43 to the extent of 5 acres 18 guntas. In this regard, the accused No.2 has produced Ex.P.211 the partition deed along with his application to show that he has inherited 2 acres 28 guntas from Sy. No.39 of Ittagalpura village, Hesarabhatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. The boundaries of the said properties are to the East: Govt. land, towards the west: Portion of the property of Galappa, to the north: the portion of the property belonging to the accused No.2 Rajanna in Sy. No.43, to the south land of Chinnamma. So also, he has inherited 2 acres 39 guntas from Sy. No.43 of Ittagalpura village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. The boundaries of the said properties are to the East: Lands of Motappa, Doddamotappa's Chinnappa, to the West:
Land of Gowdara Chinnappa and Kondappa, to the North: Land of Chinnagappa and Mariyappa, to the South: Portion of the property of Sy. No.39 belongs to the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 150 accused No.2 T. Rajanna. On perusal of the boundaries of the Sy. No.39 and 43 fallen to the share of the accused No.2 are part and parcel of the property already mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch. Earlier during 2003 at the time of availing the loan from the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameen Bank, there was no partition in the family of A2. Therefore he has mortgaged entire 9A. 17G of his joint family property in favour of the said Bank. As such the boundaries of both the properties obviously cannot be same. In other words, as the properties mortgaged in favour of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch is part and parcel of the property mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch.
Owing to due to the technical irregularities, the encumbrance in respect of the mortgage of the said property were not entered in the Sub-Registrar's office.
In this regard, the Sub-Registrar of the Yalahanka Branch has specifically deposed before this court that at the time of issue of encumbrance certificate they will see Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 151 only Sy. No. and boundaries of the properties, if the boundaries of the properties are different they will issue Nil Encumbrance Certificate, because of this technical irregularities in recording the boundaries of the properties. It appears that the accused has taken the benefit of the said irregularity of not entering the encumbrance of the entire 9 acres 17 guntas which were already mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch & has after partition has mortgaged only his share of the property in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru.
In other words, before taking loan and before mortgaging his share of the property in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru, the accused No.2 has already mortgaged his undivided share i.e., the joint family properties of his family measuring 9 acres 17 guntas in Sy. No.39 and 43 of Ittagalpura village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. In this regard the PW.54, the Manager of the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch has Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 152 deposed before this court that as the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch already is having charge over the said property by virtue of the mortgage deed executed by the accused No.2, the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch is having prior charge and right over the said property of 9 acres 17 guntas. Thereby the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru which has got charge on 5 acres 17 guntas of the property belonging to the accused No.2 by way of mortgage will have second charge or right over the said property. Therefore, this itself goes to show that the accused No.2 intentionally and knowing very well that he has already mortgaged 9 acres 17 guntas of land in Sy. No.39 and 43 of the Ittagalpura village with Kaveri Kalapthru Grameen Bank has mortgaged his share of the property in favour of the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch i.e., part and parcel of the property which has already been mortgaged in favour of the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Thereby the accused No.2 fraudulently and with an malfide intention Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 153 to cheat the Vijaya Bankl Yalahanka Branch has misrepresented the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch by mortgaging part and parcel of the property which has already mortgaged in favour of Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch thereby accused No.2 has made the Vijaya Bank to suffer by having second charge over the said property after the charge exhausted by the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch on the said property.
Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.2 has with malafide intention to cheat the Vijaya Bank and cause loss to the Vijaya Bank has created the mortgage in favour of Vijaya Bank. In this regard, admittedly, even after the best efforts made by the panel of advocates of the Vijaya Bank and the valuators of the Vijaya Bank could not able to trace out the said mortgage which was already existing in favour of the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch before mortgaging the said property in favour of Vijaya Bank.
Further, even the PW.2 and PW.5 have admitted that the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 154 accused No.1 was not aware of the said mortgage of the property by the accused No.2 in favour of the Cauvery Kalpatharu bank Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch at the time of Accused no.2 mortgaging his share of property in favour of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch.
Therefore, the accused No.1 cannot be blamed for taking the mortgage the property of 5 acres 17 guntas in respect of Sy. No.39 and 43 of Ittagalpura village. In other words, the accused No.1 was not at all aware of the fact that the accused No.2 has already mortgaged his undivided share including his joint family property of his family to the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, Rajanukunte Branch. Therefore, accused No.1 cannot said to be at fault and it cannot be said that the accused No.1 has colluded and has conspired with the accused No.2 for creating the mortgage of the said property at the time of recommendation of the said loan by the accused No.1. On going through the above said documents, it clearly goes to show that the accused no.2 had a malafide intention and in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 155 intentionally has mortgaged his share of the property in Sy. No.39 and 43 even though the said property was already mortgaged with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. In this regard, even though the learned advocate for accused No.2 tried to canvas that the property that has been mortgaged with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank was different with the property mortgaged with the Vijaya Bank, the said argument itself cannot be accepted because the property mortgaged in favour of the Vijaya Bank is part and parcel of the property already mortgaged with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Further, it cannot be said that the accused No.2 was not having knowledge of mortgaging the said property earlier with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank at the time of the mortgaging said property with the Vijaya Bank.
Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.2 was well aware of the fact that he has already mortgaged his share of the property with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank before he mortgaging the same with the Vijaya Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 156 Bank. In this regard, admittedly the accused No.2 has produced some encumbrance certificate in respect of the properties at Sy. No.39 and 43 to mislead the Vijaya Bank intentionally to establish that the said property was not mortgaged with any bank earlier. Here, if the accused No.2 had not having any malafide intention he could have brought it to the notice of Vijaya Bank before mortgaging the said property with the Vijaya Bank. He has suppressed the said fact before the Vijaya Bank by not disclosing the said fact and by misleading the creating of the charge over the said property by production of the Nil Encumbrance in respect of the said property. Therefore, the accused No.1 or any of his senior officers could not make out that the said property was mortgaged with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank before the said property is mortgaged with the Vijaya Bank. This fact has been fortified by the other witnesses. Therefore, it is the accused No.2 only held responsible and liable for falsely representing of the said property which were already mortgaged in favour of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 157 Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank, at Rajanukunte Branch thereby accused No.2 alone is liable to be punished for cheating.
86. Further, it is also allegation of the prosecution that accused No.2 who has got released his loan of Rs.2,31,51,761/- by way of transfers and RTGS on 81 occasions from 11.10.2008 to 26.8.2010 by submitting requisition slip along with the invoices of the suppliers, labour charges has got released the said loan by way of Banker's DD. It also admitted fact that the said Banker's DD/banker's cheque obtained by the accused No.2 from the Vijaya Bank has been encashed by the said suppliers. But it can be seen that some of the suppliers have returned portion of the said Banker's cheque in favour of accused No.2. In other words, the said amounts released in favour of the said suppliers were not being fully utilized for the said purpose. In this regard, I would like to further elicit the fact that as per the evidence of PW.34, the Manager of the Karnataka Bank, K.H. Road Branch, Bengaluru has deposed before this Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 158 court that M/s. Aryan Pipes Pvt., Ltd., is having current account with their branch and the said Aryan Pipes Pvt., Ltd., has issued cheques at Ex.P.184 of Rs.7,00,000/-
dated 31.8.2007 in favour of accused No.2 Rajanna, as per Ex.P.185 cheque dt. 7.9.2007 of Rs.64,116/- were issued in favour of accused No.2 Rajanna. In this regard, nothing has been elicited during the course of cross- examination as to why and how the said M/s. Aryan Pipes Pvt., Ltd., has issued the said cheques in favour of the Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. In other words, it goes to show that the accused No.2 who has received the said cheque amounts from the said M/s. Aryan Pipes Pvt., Ltd., which ought to have deposited the same in his account with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch but he has suppressed the said fact and has not shown the said cheques to the Vijaya Bank from whom he has received the said loan.
87. Further, the accused No.2 has also received 7 cheques from the Vijeet Steels as per Ex.P.173. The said cheques are drawn by Vijeet Steels on Canara Bank dt.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 159 27.12.2007 of Rs.5 lakhs, dt. 2.1.2008 of Rs.3,07,754/-, dt. 2.1.2008 of Rs.4,17,303/-, dt. 9.1.2008 of Rs.3,59,241/-, dt. 11.1.2008 of Rs. Two lakhs, dt. 16.1.2008 of Rs.4,22,000/-, dt.5.2.2008 of Rs.42,919/-. Further, as per the Ex.P.273, cheque dt. 30.10.2007 of Rs.2,01,958/-, cheque dt. 7.11.2007 of Rs.2,86,330/- as per Ex.P.274. As Ex.P.275 cheque dated 15.11.2007 of Rs. Four lakhs, as per Ex.P.276 cheque dt. 22.11.2007 of Rs. Three lakhs, as per Ex.P.277 cheque dt. 5.12.2007 of Rs. Three lakhs, as per Ex.P.278 cheque dt. 6.12.2007 of Rs.44,460/- all the above Ex.P.273 to 278 cheques were drawn in favour of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm and as per the evidence of PW.47 Manager of the HDFC Bank, Basaveshwara Nagar Branch, Bengaluru has deposed that the said Ex.P.73 to P78 were honoured through the Vijaya Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru. In this regard, PW.31 Vinod V. Malve, the partner of Vijeet Steels has deposed that the accused No.2 used to give him DD obtained from the Bank for supply of the materials. Therefore, when the accused No.2 has received the said 7 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 160 cheque amounts from the said company, it is his duty to deposit the said cheque amounts with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch either to his loan account or to current account with the said bank. Surprisingly the accused No.2 has not operated his current account with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru. Here, accused No.1 was not having the knowledge of the bank account of the accused No.2 with the ICICI Bank because admittedly the said account of the accused No.2 with the ICICI Bank was opened after the accused No.1 has been transferred from the said bank.
88. Further, admittedly the said Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm started its production of hatchery eggs and has earned income after accused No.1 transferred from the said Branch. In this regard, I would like to discuss that as per Ex.P.138(a) the Unit Inspection Report dated 19.2.2008 submitted by the K. Seetharama Shetty (PW.17), the successor of the accused No.1 has reported that the construction work of the two sheds has been completed, about 40 workers were working in the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 161 unit. Further, the party has already purchased 1st batch of chicks was kept at the rearing shed taken on rental basis. Further, he has reported that the overall progress of the work in the farm is full swing. So also as per Ex.P.139, the Farm Inspection Report dated 12.3.2008 submitted by the K.S. Shetty (PW.17) has reported that the first batch of the 4 sheds were completed, the five other sheds work is in full progress and it is completed up to 75%. Further, as per Ex.P.142, the Unit Inspection Report dated 9.3.2009 by the K.S. Shetty, PW.17 has reported that the project report submitted to us, is not fully completed. Further, as per the Inspection Report at Ex.P.140 dated 25.2.2009 submitted by the K. Seetharama Shetty, the Inspection Report as per Ex.P.141 dated 27.3.2008 submitted by the K. Seetharama Shetty, Joint Inspection Report dated 7.4.2008 as per Ex.P.143 submitted by the Narayan G Bhat, Senior Manager, RO Bangalore-North and Seetharam Shetty PW.17, Senior Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, the Inspection Report dated Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 162 20.4.2008 as per Ex.P.144, 30.4.2008 as per Ex.P.145, 13.5.2008 as per Ex.P.146 submitted by the K. Seetharama Shetty, PW.17, joint inspection report as per Ex.P.147 submitted by the Narayan G Bhat, Senior Manager, RO Bangalore-North and Seetharam Shetty PW.17, Senior Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, the Inspection Report dated 20.8.2008 submitted by Appi Reddy, Consulting Engineer and Approved Valuer as per Ex.P.149 has submitted his report. In the said reports, it is reported about the progress of the work completed by the accused No.2 of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. The inspection report dated 27.6.2008 as per Ex.P.148 submitted by the PW.17 K. Seetharama Shetty. Periodical Inspection Report dated 31.10.2009 submitted by the Manager (Agric) and Senior Branch Manager have reported about the completion of the construction of four sheds. Further, the Unit Inspection Report dated 13.4.2010 submitted by Sri. Rathan Kumar Hegde, Assistant Manager, Sri. S.B. Patil, Senior Branch Manager and Sri. Basavaraj K. Alagawadi, Chief Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 163 Manager, RO., the Unit Inspection Report dated 26.7.2010 submitted by Sri. S.B. Patil, Senior Branch Manager, Yalahanka and Sri. Rathan Kumar Hegde, Assistant Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yelahanka goes to show that the said Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm has already started earning income by sale of the hatcheries and eggs of the chicks. Further, as per the contents of the said report about 18,000 to 20,000 birds are being maintained in the said sheds and on an average 7000 eggs were produced daily. Further, as per the said reports and the evidence of PW.57 Venkatesh, Partner of the Pooja Hatcheries goes to show that the said hatching egg cost Rs.14 to Rs.15 per hatching egg. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.2 was earning at least Rs.1,35,000/-per day (7000 x 15 per hatching egg). In this regard, the said purchasers of hatchery eggs from the Sai Poultry Breeding Farm have deposed to that effect. It goes to show that the accused has started his earning from 2008 itself(as per the Ex.P.D.1 dated.23-5- 2008) But surprisingly he has not deposited or made Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 164 dealings with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch in respect of the crediting the said sale proceeds of hatchery eggs. It goes to show that the accused No.2 does not want to deposit or pay the loan installments to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch. Therefore, he did not ventured to deposit the sale proceeds of the hatchery eggs with the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanak Branch. Further, as per Ex.D5, financial statement such as Trading Account, Profit And Loss Account and Balance sheet for the year ending 31.3.2009 goes to show that accused had the sale proceeds of Rs.2,68,05,758/- and gross profit of Rs.19,29,230/- and the net profit of Rs.5,84,736/- as per the Trading and Profit & Loss Account for the said period. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No.2 has earned sufficient profit even with the four poultry sheds and he was capable to repay the loan installments to the Vijaya Bank. But he diverted the said sale proceeds by opening a bank account in the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 165
89. Further, admittedly accused No.2 has opened the bank accounts in the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch, Bengaluru as per the account extract at Ex.P.280. Further, it can also be seen from the evidence of PW.48, the Branch Manager of the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch that accused No.2 who is having transaction with the said Branch has made transactions of about 2.5 crores, in other words, whenever the said suppliers who have returned the part of the Banker's cheque amount (which were issued by the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch as a part of the loan) ought to have been credited the said cheques issued by the said suppliers to his loan account. In other words, the accused No.2 has suppressed the fact that the said suppliers who have returned the part of the amount which were issued for releasing of the loan and has got credited the said cheques in his account with the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch. In this regard, 81 original cheques at Ex.P.284 to 364 were produced by the PW.48, the Manager of the ICICI Bank goes to fortify the fact that the accused No.2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 166 has withdrawn through about 81 cheques the amount which were received from the different suppliers which were deposited in his bank account of ICICI Bank. In other words, he has dealt with his account with the ICICI Bank and Syndicate Bank, Rajajinagara Branch, Bengaluru. Thereby whatever he has received from the suppliers either for short supply of the materials or for not supplying the materials, he has deposited the said cheque amount with the ICICI Bank. In other words, when the accused No.2 has got released his part of the loan amount for supply of the materials, when the said suppliers returned any portion of the amount either for short supply or non-supply. Such an amount shall have to be deposited to his loan account directly. Thereby the accused No.2 has acted malafidely and intentionally in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch, he has not deposited the said cheque amounts with the Vijaya Bank.
90. In this regard, the learned advocate for the accused No.2 tried to argue and canvas that merely the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 167 fact that the accused No.2 has not paid the loan installments, it cannot be said to be a malafide intention of the accused No.2. At the most, it can be considered as civil wrong which can be hesitated before the civil court for recovery of the said loan amount. There is no any malafide intention of the accused No.2 in non-payment of the said loan amount. In fact the receipts of the sale of the eggs and hatcheries were not even sufficient to maintain the said poultry business. Therefore, the accused No.2 has not repaid the said loan amount. In this regard, admittedly the accused No.2 has received some of the cheques as referred above from the suppliers wherein the said suppliers have deposed before this court that due to short supply of the materials or non-supply of the materials they have repaid the said amount to the accused No.2. Accused No.2 also not denied the said fact. Here, when the accused No.2 was well aware of the fact that the Vijaya Bank has released the loan amount to the suppliers for supply of materials, when the said suppliers returned the part of the said amount, it was his Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 168 duty to inform to the Vijaya Bank and return the said cheque to the Vijaya Bank or he should deposited the said amount with the loan account of Vijaya Bank. Here, he cannot claim ignorance of procedure of law or facts. Because when he is a big entrepreneur has invested more than Rs. Four crores in his poultry business, he must have well known the process of banking and refund or repayment of the said loan amount. Therefore, it clearly goes to show that it is the malafide intention of the accused No.2 who had no intention to reimburse or make payment of the said loan amount to the Vijaya Bank. Further, admittedly he has received about more than Rs.1.5 lakhs per day by sale of eggs and hatcheries; he has not deposited any of the said sale proceeds with loan account. Here, the learned advocate for the accused No.2 argued that the said amount has been spent for the maintenance of his business. In this regard, at the cost of repetition, I repeat as per Ex.D5 the financial statements produced by the accused himself goes to show that he has shown profit for the year ending Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 169 31.3..2009. Therefore, when he has got profit in his business, there was no reason as to why he failed to make payment of the loan installments to the Vijaya Bank. Admittedly, except the Rs. Four lakhs amount paid by the guarantor no amount was repaid to the said Vijaya Bank by the accused No.2. It has come in evidence that as on date of filing of the charge sheet, the accused No.2 was having an outstanding loan amount of more than Rs. Six crores. Admittedly, the charge sheet has been filed during 2013, now four years have been elapsed the said outstanding may be more than Rs. eight crores. Therefore, it goes to show that the accused No2. with the malafide intention and in order to deceive the Vijaya Bank, intentionally has not deposited the said cheque amount received from the suppliers towards the shortage of the material supplied and intentionally in order to deceive the Vijaya Bank has not paid any of the installments even though he is having sufficient income and showing profit in his books of accounts. This itself Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 170 goes to show that in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank has done so.
91. Further, admittedly accused No.2 who is having his current account with the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch has made transaction with the said bank. In this regard, the PW.48 the Branch Manager of the ICICI Bank, Yalahanka Branch has produced 81 cheques issued by the accused No.2 as a Proprietor of Sri Sai Breeding Farm, the description of the said cheques at Ex.P.284 to Ex.P.364 is as under: -
Sl. No. Exhibit No. Date of the cheque Amount in Rs.
1. 284 11.10.2008 4,50,000
2. 285 14.10.2008 1,00,000
3. 286 14.10.2008 90,000
4. 287 24.10.2008 1,00,000
5. 288 23.10.2008 2,40,000
6. 289 30.10.2008 1,00,000
7. 290 31.10.2008 1,75,000
8. 291 17.11.2008 1,60,000
9. 292 21.11.2008 1,00,000
10. 293 22.11.2008 1,00,000
11. 294 1.1.2009 1,75,000 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 171
12. 295 23.1.2009 1,45,000
13. 296 13.7.2009 1,75,000
14. 297 15.7.2009 1,00,000
15. 298 17.7.2009 55,000
16. 299 17.7.2009 2,30,000
17. 300 21.7.2009 1,00,000
18. 301 25.7.2009 2,90,000
19. 302 29.7.2009 1,50,000
20. 303 12.8.2009 3,00,000
21. 304 14.8.2009 2,80,000
22. 305 27.8.2009 1,55,000
23. 306 29.8.2009 2,75,000
24. 307 16.9.2009 2,90,000
25. 308 22.9.2009 60,000
26. 309 26.9.2009 3,00,000
27. 310 1.10.2009 3,10,000
28. 311 3.10.2009 3,10,000
29. 312 7.10.2009 3,20,000
30. 313 12.10.2009 3,15,000
31. 314 13.10.2009 3,25,000
32. 315 21.10.2009 3,30,000
33. 316 22.10.2009 3,30,000
34. 317 29.10.2009 3,40,000
35. 318 31.10.2009 3,30,000
36. 319 4.11.2009 3,30,000 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 172
37. 320 9.11.2009 3,40,000
38. 321 12.11.2009 3,39,000
39. 322 14.11.2009 3,30,000
40. 323 19.11.2009 3,39,000
41. 324 24.11.2009 2,00,000
42. 325 25.11.2009 1,40,000
43. 326 27.11.2009 3,35,000
44. 327 4.12.2009 2,00,000
45. 328 18.12.2009 3,00,000
46. 329 24.12.2009 1,90,000
47. 330 31.12.2009 1,20,000
48. 331 4.1.2010 1,00,000
49. 332 5.1.2010 1,30,000
50. 333 8.1.2010 1,00,000
51. 334 9.1.2010 2,00,000
52. 335 16.1.2010 1,00,000
53. 336 20.1.2010 1,00,000
54. 337 20.1.2010 2,00,000
55. 338 3.4.2010 1,50,000
56. 339 6.4.2010 1,50,000
57. 340 7.4.2010 1,50,000
58. 341 9.4.2010 2,00,000
59. 342 9.4.2010 2,00,000
60. 343 17.4.2010 4,00,000
61. 344 20.4.2010 2,00,000 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 173
62. 345 21.4.2010 2,00,000
63. 346 23.4.2010 2,00,000
64. 347 4.5.2010 2,00,000
65. 348 3.8.2010 2,00,000
66. 349 7.5.2010 2,00,000
67. 350 14.5.2010 2,00,000
68. 351 17.5.2010 2,00,000
69. 352 18.5.2010 2,00,000
70. 353 26.5.2010 2,00,000
71. 354 4.6.2010 2,00,000
72. 355 5.6.2010 2,00,000
73. 356 10.6.2010 2,00,000
74. 357 14.6.2010 2,00,000
75. 358 18.6.2010 2,00,000
76. 359 24.6.2010 2,00,000
77. 360 30.6.2010 5,00,000
78. 361 3.7.2010 2,00,000
79. 362 10.8.2010 60,000
80. 363 26.8.2010 1,00,000
81. 364 22.8.2009 2,75,000 Total cheque amount 2,65,00,000 On going through the above said transactions, it goes to show that the accused No.2 has withdrawn his sale proceedings which were deposited with the ICICI Bank.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 174 He has nowhere informed about deposit of sale proceedings with the ICICI bank to the Vijaya Bank. In this regard also, at the cost of repetition, I repeat that the accused only with a malafide intention even though he has deposited more than Rs.2.5 crores with the ICICI Bank, he has not made any attempt or made any single repayment of the loan amount to the Vijaya Bank. Had he made any attempt to pay at least 50% of the said sale proceedings for repayment of the said loan amount, he could have said to have been shown his bonafideness with the Vijaya Bank.
92. Further, it has been argued by the learned advocate for the accused No.2 that the said loan amount was not sufficient for construction of the entire 20 sheds. In this regard, PW.21 has deposed before this court at page No.2 at para-3 as under:
"3. I had gone to project site along with Seetharam Shetty, accused No.2 on 31/5/2008. After inspection, I requested for working drawings for the sheds proposed for construction from A.2. After 15 days A.2 gave me the drawings, based on the drawing given by A.2, I prepared the detailed estimate and Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 175 abstract estimate adopting the Indian Space Research Organization schedule of rates pertaining to the year 2007 and 2008. After calculation I found that the cost of construction of sheds for sq. ft., comes to Rs.330/- and hence I retained the earlier valuation report in which the cost of construction for sq. ft., which was given as Rs.307/- and I did not want to increase the project price."
93. Further, the said witness during the cross- examination in para-10 of page No.7 has deposed that:
"..... I arrived the cost of construction was Rs.340 per square feet but I retained the earlier valuation made by earlier valuer at Rs.307 per square feet. I have recommended for sanction of additional credit facility in the event of furnishing the security of additional land."
Relying on the evidence of the said witness, the learned advocate for accused No.2 try to argue and canvas that as the said loan released in favour of the accused No.2 was not sufficient for construction of the entire 16 sheds as per the project already sanctioned. Therefore, the accused No.2 could not able to achieve the target of production as estimated. Hence, he could not able to repay the said loan amount and succeed in the said project. In this regard, I do admit that even though the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 176 said loan was sanctioned earlier, keeping in view the project report and the estimations submitted the accused No.2, obviously due to the passage of time there will be increase in the value of the materials and the increase in the market price. Therefore, I do admit that the accused No.2 needs additional fund. In this regard, PW.17 K. Seetharama Shetty, the Senior Manager who succeeded the accused No.1 during the cross-examination in page No.17 has admitted that:
"It is true that, if the additional funds had been sanctioned to A.2 as per the report of panel valuers, the project would have been completed."
Further, the advocate for accused No.2 has posed question to the same witness during the cross- examination in page No.17 as under: -
Question: A.2 the borrower has done everything according to banking norms and in view of the additional funds not sanctioned, he was not able to complete the project and there is no misuse of funds by A.2?
Answer: Additional loan not considered by the Regional Office is the only answer given by the witness.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 177 Therefore, it is the case of the accused No.2 that as the additional loan was not sanctioned, the project was not completed. Hence, accused No.2 cannot be liable for misuse of the funds. In this regard, admittedly the said witness in page No.16 has deposed in respect of the panel valuer reports has spoken that:
"Out of them 2 reports were by Sri. H.S. Nagaraj and one report by Sri Appi Reddy. All the above said 3 reports of panel valuers were accepted by the Bank. In the 2nd and 3rd panel valuation stated above there was mention about escalation of prices regarding materials and recommendation for additional fund to the tune of Rs.2.50 crores. One Sri HSBR Gowda retired Canara Bank official and one Sri Subramanya retired Canara Bank official reassessed the last 2 valuation reports stated above and they have also given their reports that for completing the project, additional fund of Rs.2.50 crores is required. In that respect A.2 did not give any document to the Bank regarding the collateral security to be offered for additional funds. ...."
Therefore, it goes to show that even though the Vijaya Bank has intended to sanction additional funds to the accused No.2, accused No.2 did not provided additional security for release of the said additional funds. It is the accused No.2 himself is liable for not getting the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 178 additional loan released in his favour. Thereby, the accused No.2 cannot take advantage of his own wrong. In other words, at one stretch, accused No.2 claims that he could not complete his project work due to the lack of additional funds at the other stage, as he did not provided the additional security, as such the said additional loan was not sanctioned. Therefore, it cannot be said that the accused No.2 can take benefit of the same for non-completion of his project work. On the contrary, on perusal of the Ex.D5 the financial statements for the year ending 31.3.2009, accused No.2 has earned sufficient net profit in the initial year of his business. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, it goes to show that the accused No.2 with a malafide intention in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank even though having sufficient income and source has not paid any loan installments to the Vijaya Bank. One more fact is to considered to establish the intention of the accused No.2 that even there is no charge to that effect is that, addimtedly accused No.2 was having bank Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 179 account in name of Sri Sai poultry farm with Vijaya Bank, (the loan a/c) with ICICI Bank (as per Ex.P.280), with Ingvisha bank (as per Ex.P.199) and with syndicate Bank (as per Ex. P.191). But surprisingly or with any other intention best known the accused No.2 has not shown said bank accounts in his financial statements for the year ending 31-3-2009. The accused No.2 has produced Ex.D.5 the financial statements for the year ending 31-3-2009 which apparently appears to be not true financial statement of the accused No.2.
94. In view of the above discussions, I am of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has conspired with the accused No.2 in recommending the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has failed to get proper security for release of the said loan. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has intentionally and negligently has failed to maintain Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 180 the margin amount at the time of the release of the loan amount in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has shown his negligence at the time of the opening of the bank accounts of Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware by violating the KYC norms. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has violated the KYC norms at the time of opening current account of M/s. Babu Engineering Works. The prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 in pursuance of the conspiracy has provided the borrowers credit evaluation report dated 8.3.2007, the risk rating scoring sheet dated 28.3.2007 to the accused No.2 as alleged. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has conspired with the accused No.2 in doing the said illegal acts as alleged. Thereby the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt the Accused No.1 has not committed offence punishable u/s 120B and 420 of IPC.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 181
95. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 in collusion with the accused No.2 has cheated the Vijaya Bank in order to get unlawful gain in his favour or in favour of anybody as alleged. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 in collusion with the accused No.2 has obtained and accepted the security in respect of Sy. No.39 and 43 of Ittagalpur village in respect of the said loan even though he had knowledge of the mortgaging the said property by the said accused No.2 with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Further, the prosecution has also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has induced the accused No.2 to mortgage the same property by the accused No.2 to the Bank of India after the said property has already been mortgaged with the Vijaya Bank. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has committed offence punishable u/s 467 and 471 of IPC.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 182
96. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 fraudulently and dishonestly recommended the said term loan of the accused No.2 to the Regional Office. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 dishonestly with the malafide intention and negligently has furnished the borrowers credit evaluation report, risk rate scoring sheet to the accused No.2 which are considered as confidential documents as alleged. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has shown his negligence, without complying the terms and conditions of the said loan has released the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the prosecution also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1 has negligently and without following the bank procedures and rules has not collected the cash memos, bills, payment vouchers, tax invoice or delivery challans from the suppliers at the time of the release of the part of the loan of the accused No.2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 183 to the suppliers as alleged. Further, the prosecution also failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has not conducted pre-sanction inspection, post-sanction inspection of the site of the accused No.2 and has shown his negligence in proposing and releasing the said loan in favour of the accused No.2. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 by abusing his official position as a Senior Manager of the Bank has obtained for himself or for any other person pecuniary advantage as alleged thereby the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 has committed an offence u/s 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
97. Further, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.2 has conspired with the accused No.1 in doing illegal acts in collusion with the accused No.1 as alleged, thereby the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 184 doubt that accused No.2 has committed offence punishable u/s 120-B of IPC.
98. The prosecution has filed a charge sheet against accused No.2 for the offence punishable u/s 471 and 467 of IPC. In this regard, as I have discussed in above judgment, as the Kempegowda Nagar Police have already filed a charge sheet against accused No.2 and his wife Sarvamangala for the offences punishable u/s 467 and 471 of IPC and other related offences in respect of the accused No.2 and his wife Sarvamangala have mortgaged the agricultural land bearing Sy. No.39 and 43 of Ittagalpura village, which was already mortgaged with the Vijaya Bank in respect of the present loan on hand. Therefore, in view of the discussion made above, this court cannot appreciate any evidence and give any opinion or judgment in respect of the same offence i.e., Sec. 467 and 471 of IPC. Therefore, this court reserves the right of the XXIV ACMM Court, Bengaluru to try the accused No.2 and his wife in respect of the said offence in accordance with law.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 185
99. Further, the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.2 intentionally, malafidely in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank has provided the security of the property bearing Sy. No.39 and 43 of Ittagalpura village in respect of his share of the property even though he had already mortgaged the said property along with his joint family properties with the Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Branch, Rajanukunte Branch. Further, the prosecution has also proved beyond all reasonable doubt that accused even though he had sufficient income source from his poultry farm and has shown profit in the books of accounthas not paid any instalments of his loans and diverted the said income for some other purpose. Further, even though the accused No.2 had knowledge, intentionally in order to cheat the Vijaya Bank has not deposited the cheque amount received from the suppliers who have returned the part of the amount for non-supply of the materials or short supply of the materials. The accused No.2 even though he bound to and liable to repay the said loan amount to Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 186 the Vijaya Bank intentionally and malafidely has not repaid any of the loan instalments in order to cause financial loss to the Vijaya Bank. Thereby, the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.2 has committed an offence of cheating punishable u/s 420 of IPC.
100. Therefore, the accused No.1 is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s 120B, 420, 467 and 471 of IPC and Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Accused No.2 is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s 120B of IPC. The accused No.2 is found guilty for the offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in Negative, Point No.2 Partly in the affirmative, Point No.3 and 4 in negative in respect of Accused No.1, and as against Accused No.2 as no opinion given and Point No.5 in the negative.
101. Point No.6: In view of my findings to the above points, I proceed to pass the following:
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 187 ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 is acquitted for the offences punishable u/s 120-B, 420, 467 and 471 of IPC and Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.2 is acquitted for the offences punishable u/s 120-B of IPC.
Acting under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C., Accused No.2 is hereby convicted for the offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC.
Further, the XXIV ACMM Court, Bengaluru is at liberty and permitted to try the case against the accused No.2 and his wife Sarvamangala for the offence punishable u/s 467 and 471 of IPC and other related offences on the basis of the charge sheet already filed by Kempegowda Nagar Police Station in accordance with law.
The accused No.1 is set at free and his bail bond stands cancelled. Further the accused No.1 is hereby directed to appear before the Appellate Court if the appeal is filed by the prosecution or anybody in accordance with law.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 188 Further as per Sec.363 of Cr.P.C., Office is hereby directed to supply free copy of the judgment to the accused No.2.
Further as per Sec.365 of Cr.P.C., office is directed to send copy of the findings to the District Magistrate, Bengaluru.
To hear Accused No.2 regarding the passing of sentence for the offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by him, revised by me personally and incorporated additional paragraphs directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 23rd day of November, 2017) (Sadashiva S. Sultanpuri) XXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge & And Prl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru City.
ORDER REGARDING SENTENCE Called later. The learned Public Prosecutor present.
Advocate for accused No.2 present.
Heard regarding passing of the sentence against accused No.2 for the offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC.
It is submitted by the learned advocate for the accused No.2 that the Vijaya Bank has already filed a Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 189 civil suit against accused No.2 before the DRT for recovery of entire loan amount and have also seized his entire property. Therefore, the accused No.2 is not having any property and now he is having no income.
Further, it is also brought to the notice of this court that the accused No.2 is having two kids and wife and as such the economic condition of the accused No.2 is very critical. Hence, it is submitted by the advocate for accused No.2 that a lenient view may be taken against accused No.2 while passing the sentence.
Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused No.2 has committed the offence of cheating against the bank which is considered as economic offence. More particularly, accused No.2 has mortgaged his property to the present Vijaya Bank even though it was earlier mortgaged to Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank. Further, accused No.2 has continued the same act and has mortgaged the said property with the Bank of India even though he has already mortgaged the said property with the Vijaya Bank. Therefore, the Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 190 accused No.2 has contined to involve in cheating not only the present Vijaya Bank, Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena Bank earlier and the Bank of India at the later stage.
Further, the accused No.2 has caused more than Rs. Six crores of loss to the Vijaya Bank by diverting his income in not paying the said loan amount. Therefore, it is prayed by the learned Public Prosecutor to pass a maximum sentence and maximum fine as per law against the accused No.2.
In view of the submissions of both the sides, admittedly as on date of filing of the chargesheet, the accused was due to the extent of Rs. Six crores to the Vijaya Bank now it might have been increased to more than Rs. Eight crores. Admittedly accused No.2 has not paid single instalment of loan to the Vijaya Bank.
Further, as per the discussions made in the above referred judgment even though the accused had sufficient income he had diverted the said income for other purpose other than for which the loan has been granted. Further, he has also cheated the present Vijaya Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 191 Bank, Cauvery Kalpatharu Grameena bank and later the Bank of India. Therefore, it goes to show that accused No.2 not only caused loss to the said Banks indirectly it also caused loss to the national economy at large, because if the banks are at loss it will reflect on the financial condition of the nation at large. More particularly the huge amount is involved in the present case on hand. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the accused No.2 is not entitled for any leniency.
Further, even though the advocate the accused No.2 submitted that the accused is having wife and children surprisingly it is also brought to the notice of this court during the course of trial that even the wife of the accused No.2 has also involved in forging the document and producing the said document as a mortgage to the Bank of India. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the accused No.2 is not entitled for leniency from any corner as prayed by the advocate for accused.
Further, admittedly as per the provision of law u/s 420 of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 192 IPC the punishment is extended upto 7 years and also liable to fine. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that it is just and proper if accused No.2 is sentenced to undergo 5 (five) years Rigorous Imprisonment and also fine of Rs.10,00,000/- as it will meed the ends of justice.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following ORDER Accused No.2 is ordered to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 (five) years and also fine of Rs.10,00,000/- for the offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 6 (Six) months.
Acting u/s 428 Cr.P.C., the days spent by accused No.2 in judicial custody during investigation and trial of this case if any is given set off towards the imprisonment ordered.
Office is directed to issue conviction warrant accordingly.
M.Os., 1 to 21 are ordered to be destroyed as worthless after the appeal period.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 193 (Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed and computerized by him on the computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 23rd day of November 2017) (Sadashiva S. Sultanpuri) XXI Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge And Prl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE
PROSECUTION:
P.W.1 T.S. Jayanth
P.W.2 C. Sathish Ballal
P.W.3 S.N. Sathyanarayana
P.W.4 P. Jayanth Shetty
P.W.5 S. Anantha Swamy
P.W.6 Satish S
P.W.7 R. Srinivasan
P.W.8 Smt. Madhavi D.N.
P.W.9 Sri. Birendra Singh
P.W.10 B.V. Nagaraj
P.W.11 Radha Krishna Shetty
P.W.12 N. Prakash Chandra Shetty
P.W.13 Narayanan G. Bhatt
P.W.14 Shankara Gowda Patil
P.W.15 S. S. Shreedhar
P.W.16 Ravi Shankar Mishra
P.W.17 K. Seetharama Shetty
P.W.18 RSDB Gowda
P.W.19 S. R. Nanda Kumar
P.W.20 C. Manohar
P.W.21 K. Appi Reddy
P.W.22 K. Ramesh Kumar
P.W.23 Nutan Shetty. T.
P.W.24 Ratan Kumar Hegde
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
194
P.W.25 C. Saravanan
P.W.26 M.C. Sajith Kumar
P.W.27 B. Mahaboob
P.W.28 B. Dadapeer
P.W.29 H. S. Nagaraj
P.W.30 S. Govindarajan
P.W.31 Vinod V. Malve
P.W.32 R. Chandra Kumar
P.W.33 M. Satish
P.W.34 K. Harishchandra
P.W.35 B. Madhav Kalkar
P.W.36 R. Deepak
P.W.37 R. Narasimha Murthy
P.W.38 R. Andress
P.W.39 Smt. R. Preethi
P.W.40 Narayana Swamy
P.W.41 Smt. S. Nalini
P.W.42 H.R. Hawaldar
P.W.43 Smt. R. Prabhavathi
P.W.44 A. H. Nagaraj
P.W.45 Ravi Kumar K.V.
P.W.46 S. Subbappa
P.W.47 S. Rohini Kumar
P.W.48 P. Satish
P.W.49 K. Madhan Mohan
P.W.50 M.N. Sathya Prakash
P.W.51 D. Kumar
P.W.52 A. Murugesan
P.W.53 Venkata Pavan Kumar
P.W.54 Umashankar. H.
P.W.55 Appayanna D. G
P.W.56 Galappa
P.W.57 C.T. Venkatesh
P.W.58 P.S. Agnihotri
P.W.59 Sanjay Basrur
P.W.60 M. V. Chandrashekhar
P.W.61 Govindaraju
P.W.62 N. Krishna Murthy
P.W.63 P. Venugopala Rao
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
195
P.W.64 A. Inbazhagan
LIST OF WITNESS EXAMINED FOR DEFENCE:
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 Original complaint dt. 1.2.2012
Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW.1
Ex.P.2 Internal Investigation Report dt. 5.5.2011
submitted by R. Srinivasan
Ex.P.3 Application for Agricultural Loan dt.
16.10.2006 submitted by A2 with Annexures Ex.P.3(a) Appraisal Form dt. 18.10.2006 Ex.P.3(b) Spot Inspectionr Report by A1 Ex.P.4 Borrower Evaluation Sheet dt. 8.3.2007 Ex.P.5 Original quotations towards purchase of D G Set, Air conditioning equipments etc., submitted to Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch.
Ex.P.6 2 Project Reports in respect of Sai Poultry Breeding Farm prepared by M/s. Echo Biotech Agri-Clinic Ex.P.7 Original Appraisal Report dt. 22.3.2007 in respect of Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Ex.P.8 Letter dt. 22.3.2007 of R.O., Vijaya Bank communicating deficiencies and justification letter furnished by the branch with enclosures.
Ex.P.8(a) Justification letter dt. 28.3.2007 to R.O., from Branch.
Ex.P.9 Letter dt. 5.7.2007 of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch to R.O., Ex.P.10 Letter dt. 6.7.2007 of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch to R.O., Ex.P.11 Letter dt. 2.8.2007 of Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch to R.O., Ex.P.12 Original Process Note of Vijaya Bank, R.O., dt. 31.7.2007 (29 sheets) Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 196 Ex.P.12(a) Proposed Sanctioned terms and conditions from page 21 to 27 Ex.P.12(b) Relevant portion in page-6 Ex.P.13 Original proceedings dated 31.7.2007 of Regional Credit Committee, Vijaya Bank, R.O., including sanction terms and conditions dt. 6.8.2007 (12 sheets). Ex.P.14 Modifications in sanction terms and conditions dt. 22.11.2007 of Vijaya Bank, R.O. (12 sheets) Ex.P.15 Original revised estimation for construction of 200' x 40' - 5 Nos. Layer Shed dt. 5.11.2007 given by Manu Asociates to Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch (55 sheets) Ex.P.15(a) Signature of PW.20 Panel Valuer at page No.55 Ex.P.16 Original Progress Report dt. 12.3.2008 submitted by H.S. Nagaraj, Panel Valuer to Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch. (17 sheets) Ex.P.17 One file containing Letters of A2 seeking loan disbursal along with receipts, letters of Babu Engineering Works towards labour charges etc. (51 sheets) Ex.P.17(a) Note on letter dt. 29.8.2007 (page No.1) Ex.P.17(b) Note on letter dt. 16.9.2007 (page No.6) Ex.P.17(c) Note on letter dt. 29.8.2007 (page No.2) Ex.P.17(d) Note on letter dt. 4.10.2007 (page No.9) Ex.P.17(e) Note on letter dt. 12.10.2007(page No.15) Ex.P.17(f) Note on letter dt. 30.10.2007(page No.19) Ex.P.17(g) Note on letter dt. 18.11.2007(page No.23) Ex.P.17(h) Note on letter dt. 11.12.2007(page No.28) Ex.P.17(i) Note on letter dt. 18.12.2007(page No.32) Ex.P.17(j) Note on letter dt. 12.1.2008 (page No.37) Ex.P.17(k) Note on letter dt. 9.2.2008 (page No.42) Ex.P.17(l) Request letter dt.6.2.08 for balance amount (page No.45) Ex.P.17(l- Signature of Mahaboob PW.27
1) Ex.P.17(m) Request letter dt.15.2.2008 for balance Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 197 amount (page No.48) Ex.P.17(m- Disputed Signature of Mahaboob PW.27
1) Ex.P.17(n) Letter of B. Dada Peer to M/s. Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-8) .
Ex.P.17(n- Signature of PW.28
1) Ex.P.17(n- Receipt dt. 16.9.2007 for Rs.1,20,000/-
2) (page-13) Ex.P.17(o) Letter of B. Dada Peer to M/s. Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-11).
Ex.P.17(o- Signature of PW.28 (page-11)
1) Ex.P.17(o- Receipt dt. 4.10.2007 for Rs.1,80,000/-
2) (page-14) Ex.P.17(p) Letter of B. Dada Peer to M/s. Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-17).
Ex.P.17(p- Signature of PW.28 (page-17)
1) Ex.P.17(p- Receipt dt. 12.10.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/-
2) (page-18) Ex.P.17(q) Receipt dt. 29.8.2007 for Rs.4,43,750/-
(page-12) Ex.P.17(q- Signature of PW.28 (page-12)
1) Ex.P.17(r) Letter dt. 30.10.2007 of B. Dada Peer to M/s.
Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-21). Ex.P.17(r- Signature of PW.28 (page-21)
1) Ex.P.17(r- Receipt dt. 30.10.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/-
2) (page-22) Ex.P.17(s) Letter dt. 18.11.2007 of B. Dada Peer to M/s.
Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-25). Ex.P.17(s- Signature of PW.28 (page-25)
1) Ex.P.17(s- Receipt dt. 10.11.2007 for Rs.50,000/- (page-
2) 26) Ex.P.17(s- Receipt dt. 18.11.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/-
3) (page-27)
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
198
Ex.P.17(t) Letter dt. 11.12.2007 of B. Dada Peer to M/s.
Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-30). Ex.P.17(t- Signature of PW.28 (page-30)
1) Ex.P.17(t- Receipt dt. 11.12.2007 for Rs.2,50,000/-
2) (page-31) Ex.P.17(u) Letter dt. 18.12.2007 of B. Dada Peer to M/s.
Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-34). Ex.P.17(u- Signature of PW.28 (page-34)
1) Ex.P.17(u- Receipt dt. 14.12.2007 for Rs.50,000/- (page-
2) 35) Ex.P.17(u- Receipt dt. 18.12.2007 for Rs.1,00,000/-
3) (page-36) Ex.P.17(v) Letter dt. 10.1.2008 of B. Dada Peer to M/s.
Sai Poultry Brreeding Farm (page-39). Ex.P.17(v- Signature of PW.28 (page-39)
1) Ex.P.17(v- Receipt dt. 10.1.2008 for Rs.5,00,000/-
2) (page-40) Ex.P.18 One bunch of letters of accused No.2 seeking loan disbursal along with receipts and letters of suppliers totally 216 sheets Ex.P.18(a) Letter dt. 12.9.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.5 Ex.P.18(a1) Handwritten Note with initial Ex.P.18(b) Letter dt. 20.9.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.11 Ex.P.18(b1) Handwritten Note with initial Ex.P.18(c) Letter dt. 5.10.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.29 Ex.P.18(c1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(d) Letter dt. 7.11.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.64 Ex.P.18(d1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(e) Letter dt. 16.11.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.70 Ex.P.18(e1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(f) Letter dt. 27.11.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 199 page No.79 Ex.P.18(f1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(g) Letter dt. 29.11.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.88 Ex.P.18(g1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(h) Letter dt. 4.11.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.98 Ex.P.18(h1) Handwritten Note with signature of A1 Ex.P.18(i) Letter dt. 9.12.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.103 Ex.P.18(i- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(j) Letter dt. 13.12.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.111 Ex.P.18(j- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(k) Letter dt. 14.12.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.116 Ex.P.18(k- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(l) Letter dt. 3.1.2008 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.138 Ex.P.18(l- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(m) Letter dt. 12.1.2008 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.144 Ex.P.18(m- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(n) Letter dt. 27.1.2008 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.150 Ex.P.18(n- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(o) Letter dt. 6.2.2008 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.161 Ex.P.18(o- Handwritten Note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.18(p) Letter dt. 28.12.2007 of A2 to Vijaya Bank at page No.132 Ex.P.18(p- Handwritten Note Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 200
1) Ex.P.19 Original account opening form of M/s. Babu Engineering Works - Current A/c. No. 652 and enclosures Ex.P.19(a) Signature of PW.28 Ex.P.20 Original account opening form of Sri Lakshmiranganatha Cement & Hardware - Current A/c. No. 653 and enclosures Ex.P.21 Statement of Account in respect of Babu Engineering Works from 29.8.2007 to 23.6.2012 with certificate Ex.P.21(a) Relevant entries to (c) Ex.P.22 Statement of Account in respect of Lakshmi Ranganatha Cement & Hardware from 29.8.2007 to 28.10.2012 with certificate Ex.P.22(a) Relevant entries to (e) Ex.P.23 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
29.8.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.16,16,571/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(a) DD dt. 8.9.2007 for Rs.7,04,840/- favouring Aryan Iron & Steel Co.
Ex.P.23(b) DD dt. 19.9.2007 for Rs.6,43,136/- favouring Aryan Iron & Steel Co.
Ex.P.23(c) DD dt. 26.9.2007 for Rs.5,98,616/- favouring Aryan Iron & Steel Co.
Ex.P.23(d) DD dt. 26.9.2007 for Rs.8,72,851/- favouring Aryan Iron & Steel Co.
Ex.P.23(e) DD dt. 17.10.2007 for Rs.3,20,699/-
favouring Aryan Iron & Steel Co.
Ex.P.23(f) Handwritten Note & Signature of A1 on letter dt. 29.8.2007 Ex.P.23(g) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
8.9.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.7,04,840/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(g1) Handwritten note with signature of A1 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 201 Ex.P.23(h) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
19.9.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,43,136/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(h1) Handwritten note with signature of A1 Ex.P.23(i) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
26.9.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.5,98,616/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(i- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.23(j) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
26.9.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.8,72,851/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(j- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.23(k) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
17.10.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,55,720/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(k- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.23(l) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
17.10.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.3,20,700/- in favour of M/s. Aryan Pipes.
Ex.P.23(l- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.24 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
25.10.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,28,220/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(a) DD dt. 8.1.2008 for Rs.4,32,600/- favouring Vijeet Steels Ex.P.24(b) DD dt. 3.11.2007 for Rs.7,34,200/- favouring Vijeet Steels Ex.P.24(c) DD dt. 3.1.2008 for Rs.7,25,200 /- favouring Vijeet Steels Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 202 Ex.P.24(d) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
3.11.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.7,34,200/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(d- Handwritten Note & Signature of A1 on letter
1) dt. 3.11.2007 Ex.P.24(e) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
13.11.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.8,36,380/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(e1) Handwritten note with signature of A1 Ex.P.24(f) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.11.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,71,640/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(f1) Handwritten note with signature of A1 Ex.P.24(g) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
1.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.13,16,480/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(h) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.10,11,800/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(h1) DD dt. 23.12.2007 for Rs.11,11,800/-
favouring Vijeet Steels Ex.P.24(h2) Handwritten note with signature of A1 Ex.P.24(i) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
27.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,58,240 /- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(i- DD dt. 28.12.2007 for Rs.6,58,240/-
1) favouring Vijeet Steels Ex.P.24(i- Handwritten note with signature of A1
2) Ex.P.24(j) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
3.1.2008 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.7,25,200/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 203 Ex.P.24(j- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.24(k) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
13.1.2008 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.13,80,438/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(k- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.24(l) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
8.1.2008 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.4,32,600/- in favour of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(l- Handwritten note with signature of A1
1) Ex.P.24(m) Proforma Invoice dt. 24.10.2007 of Vijeet Steels.
Ex.P.24(m- Signature of PW.31
1) Ex.P.24(n) Receipt dt. 24.10.2007 issued by Vijeet Steels Ex.P.24(o) 8 Receipts issued by Vijeet Steels (different dates and amount) Ex.P.24(o-1 Signature of PW.31 & o-2) Ex.P.25 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
15.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.67,500/- in favour of Kanaga Poultry Services.
Ex.P.25(a) Handwritten Note & Signature of A1 Ex.P.25(b) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.6,60,163/- in favour of Kanaga Poultry Services.
Ex.P.25(b- Handwritten Note & Signature of A1
1) Ex.P.25(c) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
6.2.2008 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.5,98,638/- in favour of Kanaga Poultry Services.
Ex.P.25(c- Handwritten Note & Signature of A1 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 204
1) Ex.P.25(d) Quotation dated 2.12.2007 of Kanaga Poultry Services Ex.P.25(d- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(e) Quotation dated 21.1.2008 of Kanaga Poultry Services Ex.P.25(e- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(f) Quotation dated 16.1.2008 of Kanaga Poultry Services Ex.P.25(f- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(g) Quotation dated 21.1.2008 of Kanaga Poultry Services Ex.P.25(g- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(h) Kanaga Poultry Services letter cum receipt dt.
18.12.2007 Ex.P.25(h- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(i) Kanaga Poultry Services letter cum receipt dt.
7.2.2008 Ex.P.25(i- Signature
1) Ex.P.25(j) Kanaga Poultry Services receipt dt.
12.12.2007 Ex.P.25(j- Signature
1) Ex.P.26 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
13.12.2007 with enclosures requesting for issue DD for Rs.7,95,750/- in favour of M/s. Ramco Industries.
Ex.P.26(a) Handwritten Note & Signature of A1 Ex.P.26(b) Ramco Industries Ltd., letter cum receipt dt.
5.11.2007 Ex.P.26(b- Signature
1) Ex.P.26(c) Ramco Industries Ltd., Proforma Invoice dt.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 205 29.10.2007 Ex.P.26(c- Signature
1) Ex.P.27 Copy of handwritten letter dt. 22.2.2007 to Sr. Br. Manager, Yalahanka Branch, Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru from S.S. Sridhar. Ex.P.27(a) Signature of PW.15 Ex.P.28 Copy of handwritten letter dt. 2.3.2007 to Sr. Br. Manager, Yalahanka Branch, Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru from S.S. Sridhar. Ex.P.29 Copy of handwritten letter dt. 7.3.2007 from S.S. Sridhar to R.O., Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru. Ex.P.29(a) Signature of S.S. Sridhar Ex.P.30 Monthly credit monitoring report dt.
13.2.2009 Ex.P.30(a) Note before G.M. dt. 16.4.2010 Ex.P.31 Attested extract of lending policy guidelines (manual advances) in respect of poultry Ex.P.32 Booklet on Delegation of powers (lending powers) w.e.f., 18.9.2006 Ex.P.33 Copy of legal audit report dated 13.11.2007 given by Shobha Rani H.G. Adv. with enclosures Ex.P.34 Copy of Circular No. 107/2000 dt. 12.5.2000 of Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.35 Copy of Circular No. 33/1999 dt. 13.2.1999 of Vijaya Bank (preliminary report on borrowers evaluation).
Ex.P.36 Copy of Circular No. 104/2000 dt. 4.5.2000 of Vijaya Bank (credit proposals - sanction conditions).
pEx.P.37 Legal Scrutiny Report dt. 17.1.2007 given by Sri. Ramesh Kumar K, Advocate Ex.P.37(a) Signature of PW.22 Ex.P.38 Copy of estimation report dt. 24.2.2007 pertaining to Sy. No.39 and 43 given by Sri. H.S. Nagaraj, Panel Valuer/Engineer to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.39 Letter dt. 28.3.2007 of Vijaya Bank issued in Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 206 compliance to the observations of R.O., and enclosures.
Ex.P.39(a) Letter dt. 13.3.2007 of Sriram Chits Ex.P.39(b) Declaration dated 4.12.2006 Ex.P.39(c) Letter dt. 12.4.2007 of Vijaya Bank to Central Bank of India, Hesarabhatta.
Ex.P.39(d) Inspection Report dt. 26.9.2007 in respect of Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P.39(d) Inspection Report dt. 16.11.2007 in respect of Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P.40 Letter dt. 3.12.2006 of Vijaya Bank to Branch Manager, BNTPA & RDB Ex.P.40(a) Declaration dated 4.12.2006 Ex.P.41 Letter dt. 24.2.2007 of Vijaya Bank to Central Bank of India, Hesarabhatta.
Ex.P.41(a) Copy of letter dt. 6.6.2007 to R.O., Ex.P.42 Letter dt. 5.7.2007 to R.O. Ex.P.43 Copy of letter dt. 2.8.2007 of Vijaya Bank to R.O., Ex.P.43(a) Copy of letter dt. 2.8.2007 of Vijaya Bank to R.O., Ex.P.44 Attested extract copy of "Book of Indstructions" Volume-1 contaning Chapter- 34 and 32 Ex.P.45 Copy of Circular No. 210/83 of Vijaya Bank in respect of Agricultural Finance - Inspection and follow up Ex.P.46 Booklet on "Credit Risk Rating Models"
Circular No. 116/2003 dt. 8.7.2003 Ex.P.47 True copy of Circular No. 84/09 dt. 5.5.2009 from Vijaya Bank, Credit Department, HO, regarding Staff Accountability. Ex.P.48 True copy of Circular No. 160/2001 dt.
12.9.2001 of Vijaya Bank regarding the Duties and Responsibilities of Asst. Branch Managers.
Ex.P.49 True copy of Circular No. 126/2005 dt.
7.7.2005 of Vijaya Bank Credit, Legal Section regarding 'Legal Audit of Loan documents'.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 207 Ex.P.50 True copy of Circular No. 127/2005 dt.
8.7.2005 of Vijaya Bank regarding the 'Legal Audit of Loan documents and title deeds'. Ex.P.51 True copy of Circular No. 230/1997 dt.
27.11.1997 of Vijaya Bank regarding the 'Sanction of Term Loans for Projects'. Ex.P.52 Statement of Account pertaining to Current A/c. No.650 in the name of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm for the period 18.8.2007 to 3.10.2010 Ex.P.53 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
3.10.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch seeking permission to shift the project from Cage System to Slater system and modification in sanction issued by Vijaya Bank, R.O. Ex.P.54 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
7.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.37594/ favouring Nathan's Vet Pharma Center. Ex.P.54(a) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.54(b) Receipt dt. 7.12.2007 Ex.P.54(c) Bills issued by Nathan's Vet Pharma Center & (d) Ex.P.54(e) Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
22.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.40947/ favouring Nathan's Vet Pharma Center. Ex.P.54(e1) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.55 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
7.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.76,659/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.55(a) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.55(b) Receipt dt. 7.12.2007 Ex.P.55(c) Invoices issued from Himalaya Trading Co., to (f) Ex.P.56 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 208 22.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.44,179/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.56(a) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.56(b) Receipt dt. 22.22.2007 Ex.P.56(c) Invoice issued from Himalaya Trading Co., Ex.P.57 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.56,230/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.57(a) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.57(b) Receipt dt. 20.1.2008 Ex.P.57(c) Invoices issued from Himalaya Trading Co., to (e) Ex.P.58 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
28.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.85,173/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.58(a) Receipt dt. 28.2.2008 Ex.P.58(b) Invoice issued from Himalaya Trading Co., Ex.P.59 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.3.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.84,760/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.59(a) Receipt dt. 23.3.2008 Ex.P.59(b) Invoice issued from Himalaya Trading Co., Ex.P.60 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
3.4.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.97,000/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.60(a) Receipt dt. 3.4.2008 Ex.P.60(b) Invoice issued from Himalaya Trading Co., Ex.P.61 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.12.4.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 209 Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.67,475/- favouring Himalaya Trading Company.
Ex.P.61(a) Receipt dt. 12.4.2008 Ex.P.61(b) Invoice issued from Himalaya Trading Co., Ex.P.62 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
5.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.25,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.62(a) Hand Written Note with initial of A1 Ex.P.62(b) Receipt dt. 5.12.2007 Ex.P.62(c) Invoices issued from Charoen Pokphand to (e) (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.63 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
11.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.50,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.63(a) Receipt dt. 11.12.2007 Ex.P.63(b) Invoice issued from Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.64 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
15.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.50,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.64(a) Receipt dt. 15.12.2007 Ex.P.64(b) Invoice issued from Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.65 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.50,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.65(a) Receipt dt. 23.12.2007 Ex.P.65(b) Invoice issued from Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.66 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 210 27.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.50,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.66(a) Receipt dt. 27.12.2007 Ex.P.67 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
3.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.87,500/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.67(a) Receipt dt. 3.1.2008 Ex.P.67(b) Invoices issued from Charoen Pokphand & (c) (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.68 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
12.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.84,488/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.68(a) Receipt dt. 12.1.2008 Ex.P.68(b) Invoices issued from Charoen Pokphand & (c) (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.69 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
18.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.1,25,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.69(a) Receipt dt. 18.1.2008 Ex.P.69(b) Invoices issued from Charoen Pokphand & (c) (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.70 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
29.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.96,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.70(a) Receipt dt. 29.1.2008 Ex.P.70(b) Invoice issued from Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.71 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
5.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 211 Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.96,000/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.71(a) Receipt dt. 5.2.2008 Ex.P.72 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
13.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.52,200/- favouring Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.72(a) Receipt dt. 13.2.2008 Ex.P.72(b) Invoice issued from Charoen Pokphand (India) Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.73 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
7.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.40,830/- favouring Kavi Agencies. Ex.P.73(a) Receipt dt. 7.12.2007 Ex.P.73(b) Invoices issued from Kavi Agencies. & (c) Ex.P.73(d) Hand written note with initial of A1 Ex.P.74 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
2.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.48,616/- favouring Uaya Agencies. Ex.P.74(a) Receipt dt. 2.2.2008 Ex.P.74(b) Invoices issued from Udaya Agencies. & (c) Ex.P.74(d) Hand written note with initial of A1 Ex.P.75 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
2.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.26,572/- favouring Minerva Pharma. Ex.P.75(a) Receipt dt. 2.2.2008 Ex.P.75(b) Invoice issued from Minerva Pharma. Ex.P.75(c) Hand written note with initial of A1 Ex.P.76 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
19.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.29,000/- favouring B.V. Feed.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 212 Ex.P.76(a) Receipt dt. 19.2.2008 Ex.P.76(b) Invoices issued from B.V. Feed. & (c) Ex.P.77 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
19.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.63,068/- favouring Tetragon Chemie Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.77(a) Receipt dt. 19.2.2008 Ex.P.77(b) Invoices issued from Tetragon Chemie Pvt., & (c) Ltd..
Ex.P.78 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
28.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.36,000/- favouring Akshata Multimin Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.78(a) Receipt dt. 28.2.2008 Ex.P.78(b) Invoice issued from Akshata Multimin Pvt., Ltd..
Ex.P.79 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.3.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.38,065/- favouring Varsha Labs. Ex.P.79(a) Receipt dt. 23.3.2008 Ex.P.79(b) Invoices issued from Varsha Labs. to (d) Ex.P.80 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
12.4.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.38,065/- favouring Tetragon Chemie Pvt., Ltd.
Ex.P.80(a) Receipt dt. 12.4.2008 Ex.P.80(b) Invoice issued from Tetragon Chemie Pvt., Ltd..
Ex.P.81 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
12.4.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.30,609/- favouring B.V. Feeds. Ex.P.81(a) Receipt dt. 12.4.2008 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 213 Ex.P.81(b) Invoice issued from B.V. Feeds Ex.P.82 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
26.3.2009 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting for extension of gestation period and reply from the bank.
Ex.P.83 Outward Register for the period 13.1.2006 to 1.3.2008 of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.84 Attendance Register for the period 2006 of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.85 Original Attendance Register for the year 2008 of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.86 Original Attendance Register for the year 2007 of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.87 Outward Register for the period 5.7.2002 to 7.7.2012 of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.88 Original Valuation Report dt. 26.7.2010 given by Nuthan Shetty, Panel Valuer to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.88(a) Signature of PW.23 Ex.P.89 Original Valuation Report dt. 19.2.2011 given by Nuthan Shetty, Panel Valuer to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.89(a) Signature of PW.23 Ex.P.90 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
9.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Sri Vinayaka Enterprises for Rs.6,80,000/- Ex.P.90(a) Receipt dt. 9.2.2008.
Ex.P.90(b) Quotation from Sri Vinayaka Enterprises.
Ex.P.90(c) Proforma Invoices from Sri Vinayaka to (e) Enterprises.
Ex.P.90(f) Vijaya Bank DD dt. 10.2.2008 for Rs.6,80,000/- favouring Sri Vinayaka Enterprises Ex.P.90(g) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
9.2.2008.
Ex.P.91 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
10.3.2008 to Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.5,89,000/-
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 214 favouring Sri Vinayaka Enterprises. Ex.P.91(a) Receipt for Rs.5,84,032/- dt. 10.3.2008. Ex.P.91(b) Quotation from Sri Vinayaka Enterprises.
Ex.P.91(c) Proforma Invoices from Sri Vinayaka to (e) Enterprises.
Ex.P.91(f) Vijaya Bank DD dt. 10.3.2008 for Rs.5,89,000/- favouring Sri Vinayaka Enterprises Ex.P.92 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
8.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Vinayaka & Co.,for Rs.6,46,767/-
Ex.P.92(a) Receipt dt. 8.2.2008.
Ex.P.92(b) Quotation dt. 4.2.2008 from Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.92 Signature of PW.33 (b-1) Ex.P.92(c) Letter dt. 5.2.2008 Sri Vinayaka & Co., to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.92 Signature of PW.33
(c-1)
Ex.P.92(d) Vijaya Bank DD dt. 8.2.2008 for Rs.6,46,767/- favouring Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.92(e) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
8.2.2008.
Ex.P.93 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
9.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Vinayaka & Co., for Rs.5,81,400/-
Ex.P.93(a) Receipt dt. 9.2.2008.
Ex.P.93(b) Quotation dt. 4.2.2008 from Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.93(c) Letter dt. 6.2.2008 Vinayaka & Co., to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.93(c1) Signature of PW.33 Ex.P.93(d) Vijaya Bank DD dt. 10.2.2008 for Rs.5,81,400/- favouring Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.93(e) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
9.2.2008.
Ex.P.94 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 215 Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Vinayaka & Co., for Rs.2,85,000/-
Ex.P.94(a) Receipt dt. 23.2.2008. Ex.P.94(b) Quotation dt. 14.2.2008 from Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.94(c) Letter dt. 18.2.2008 Vinayaka & Co., to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.94(c1) Signature of PW.33 Ex.P.94(d) Vijaya Bank DD dt. 24.2.2008 for Rs.5,15,800/- favouring Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.95 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Preethi Constructions for Rs.54,400/- Ex.P.95(a) Receipt dt. 20.1.2008. Ex.P.95(b) Letter dt. 28.8.2007 from Preethi Constructions Ex.P.95(b1) Signature of PW.39 Ex.P.95(b2) Signature of PW.39 Ex.P.95(c) Receipt dt. 20.8.2007 from Preethi Constructions for Rs.1,95,000/-. Ex.P.95(c1) Signature Ex.P.95(c2) Signature of PW.39 Ex.P.95(d) Letter dt. 13.9.2007 from Preethi Constructions to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.95(d1) Signature Ex.P.95(e) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
20.1.2008.
Ex.P.96 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.11.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch Ex.P.96(a) Receipt dt. 28.11.2007. Ex.P.96(b) Pioneer Hatcheries Proforma Invoice dt.
21.11.2007 Ex.P.97 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
7.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Pioneer Hatcheries for Rs.10,00,000/- Ex.P.97(a) Receipt dt. 7.12.2007. Ex.P.97(b) Receipt dt. 30.11.2007 from Pioner Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 216 Hatcheries Ex.P.97(c) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
7.12.2007.
Ex.P.98 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
22.12.2007 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Kundan Electronics for Rs.14,200/- Ex.P.98(a) Receipt dt. 22.12.2007. Ex.P.98(b) Tax Invoice dt. 21.12.2007 from Kundan Electronics Ex.P.98(c) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
22.12.2007.
Ex.P.99 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
20.1.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Padam Prakash Electricals for Rs.2,78,930/- Ex.P.99(a) Receipt dt. 20.1.2008.
Ex.P.99(b) 5 Tax Invoices dt. 19.1.2008 from Pdam
to (f) Prakash Electricals
Ex.P.99(g) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
20.1.2008.
Ex.P.100 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
2.2.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Padam Prakash Electricals for Rs.72,023/- Ex.P.100(a) Receipt dt. 2.2.2008. Ex.P.100(b) 3 Tax Invoices dt. 1.2.2008 from Pdam to (d) Prakash Electricals Ex.P.100(e) Handwritten Note of A1 on request letter dt.
2.2.2008.
Ex.P.101 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
24.5.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting to issue DD favouring Kundan Electronics for Rs.39,600/- Ex.P.101(a) Receipt dt. 24.5.2008 for Rs.25,443/-. Ex.P.101(b) Proforma Invoices dt. 23.5.2008 of Kundan & (c) Electronics Ex.P.102 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm letter dt.
23.5.2008 to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 217 Branch requesting to issue DD for Rs.2,31,615/- favouring Marudhar Plywoods Ex.P.102(a) Receipt dt. 23.5.2008 for Rs.1,48,812/-. Ex.P.102(b) Estimate cum Quotation dt. 12.5.2008 of & (c) Marudhar Plywoods Ex.P.103 Statement of account from 25.8.2007 to 28.12.2012 for A/c. No. SL 270017 of Sri Sri Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P.104 109 Original Debit Slips & Vouchers Ex.P.105 Statement of account from 14.9.2007 to 31.3.2012 for A/c. No. ... 652 of M/s. Babu Engineering Works.
Ex.P.106 & Vijaya Bank Credit Slips 107 Ex.P.108 Statement of account from 14.9.2007 to 30.3.2012 for A/c. No. .... 653 of M/s. Lakshmi Ranganatha Cements & Hardware. Ex.P.109 39 Vijaya Bank self cheques issued by Sri Lakshmi Ranganatha Cements & Hardware Ex.P.110 11 Vijaya Bank Credit Slips Ex.P.111 Joint Inspection Report dt. 7.4.2008 in respect of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P.111(a) Signature of PW.13 Ex.P.111(b) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.112 Joint Inspection Report dt. 26.5.2008 in respect of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P.112(a) Signature of PW.13 Ex.P.112(b) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.113 Joint Unit Inspection Report dt. 6.3.2010 in respect of Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P.113(a) Signature of PW.14 Ex.P.114 Undertaking Letter dated 2.11.2009 from MME Education India Private Ltd., to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch Ex.P.115 Letter dated 28.6.2010 from MME Education India Private Ltd., to the Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch requesting for re-present the cheque.
Ex.P.116 Debit Voucher dt. 4.2.2007 for Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 218 Rs.2,69,709.21 Ps.
Ex.P.116(a) Signature of A1 Ex.P.117 O/C of DD dt. 4.2.2007 of Vijaya Bank for Rs.2,61,239.21 Ps.
Ex.P.118 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 4.2.2007 issued by Sri. Vigneshwara Traders favouring A2 for Rs.60,000/-.
Ex.P.119 Pay-in-slip dt. 4.2.2007 for Rs.60,000/- of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.120 Vijaya Bank Debit Voucher dt. 4.2.2007 for Rs.2,00,000.
Ex.P.121 Vijaya Bank Credit Voucher dt. 4.2.2007 for Rs.2,00,000.
Ex.P.122 Statement of account from 14.9.2007 to 31.3.2012 in respect of account No. .... 537, account holder Nagaraj maintained at Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.122(a) Relevant entry Ex.P.123 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 26.4.2007 issued by A2 favouring Sri Vigneshwara Traders for Rs.6,000/-.
Ex.P.124 Pay-in-slip dt. 26.4.2007 for Rs.6,000/- of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.125 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 30.6.2007 issued by A2 favouring Sri Vigneshwara Traders for Rs.1,50,000/-.
Ex.P.126 Pay-in-slip dt. 30.6.2007 for Rs.1,50,000/- of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.127 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 29.7.2007 issued by A2 favouring Sri Vigneshwara Traders for Rs.12,000/-.
Ex.P.128 Pay-in-slip dt. 29.7.2007 for Rs.12,000/- of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.129 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 5.8.2007 issued by A2 favouring Sri Vigneshwara Traders for Rs.1.05,000/-.
Ex.P.130 Pay-in-slip for Rs.1,05,000/- of Vijaya Bank Ex.P.131 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 18.1.2008 issued by A2 favouring Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 219 for Rs.2,60,000/-.
Ex.P.132 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 11.5.2008 issued by A2 favouring Mehaboob for Rs.1,50,000/-. Ex.P.133 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 11.5.2008 issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm favouring A2 for Rs.1,00,000/-.
Ex.P.134 Vijaya Bank cheque dt. 27.6.2008 issued by Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm favouring A2 for Rs.23,000/-.
Ex.P.135 Original Valuation Report dt. 22.1.2007 submitted by H.S. Nagaraj, Panel Valuer to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.136 Copy of Valuation Report dt. 23.10.2008 submitted by H.S. Nagaraj, Panel Valuer to the Vijaya Bank.
Ex.P.137 Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch letter dt.
2.5.2009 to R.O., (Progress Report) Ex.P.137(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.138 Unit Inspection Report dt. 19.2.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.138(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.139 Farm Inspection Report dt. 12.3.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.139(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.140 Copy of Farm Inspection Report dt. 28.2.2009 done by PW.17 Ex.P.140(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.141 Inspection Report dt. 27.3.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.141(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.142 Unit Inspection Report dt. 9.3.2009 done by PW.17 Ex.P.142(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.143 Joint Inspection Report dt. 7.4.2008 done by PW.17 and another Ex.P.143(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.144 Unit Inspection Report dt. 20.4.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.144(a) Signature of PW.17 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 220 Ex.P.145 Unit Inspection Report dt. 30.4.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.145(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.146 Farm Inspection Report dt. 13.5.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.146(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.147 Joint Inspection Report dt. 26.5.2008 done by PW.17 and another Ex.P.147(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.148 Farm Inspection Report dt. 27.6.2008 done by PW.17 Ex.P.148(a) Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.149 Copy of Valuation Report dt. 20.6.2008 submitted by K. Appi Reddy, Panel Valuer Ex.P150 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 1.3.2008 for Rs.281250/-
Ex.P150(a) Signature of PW.25
Ex.P151 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 1.3.2008
for Rs.652399/-
Ex.P151(a) Signature of PW.25
Ex.P152 Sri Sai Tej Poultry Enterprises Letter dt.
30.3.2008 to GM Venkateshwara Hatcheries for supply of parent stock.
Ex.P152(a) Signature of PW.18 Ex.P.152(b) Proforma Invoices issued by M/s. Vijeet Steels to 152(j) in favour of Sai Poultry Breeding Farm. Ex.P153 Valuation Report dt. 28.3.2011given by Sri. S.R. Nanda Kumar Ex.P153(a) Signature of PW.19 Ex.P154 Valuation Report dt. 25.4.2007given by Sri. C. Manohar Ex.P154(a) Signature of PW.20 Ex.P155 Valuation Report dt. 20.6.2008 given by Sri. Appi Reddy Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 221 Ex.P155(a) Signature of PW.21 Ex.P155(b) Second Legal opinion dt. 17.1.2012 given by Sri. H. Nagesh Advocate Ex.P.156 EC in respect of Sy. No.39 & 43 of Itagalpura, Hesaraghatta Hobli.
Ex.P.157 Letter dt. 23.9.2007 of A2 to the Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank seeking release of loan amount of Rs.75,000/- along with enclosures. Ex.P.157(a) Note and signature of A1 Ex.P.158 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 4.4.2008 for Rs.278438/-
Ex.P.158(a) Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.159 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 4.4.2008 for Rs.185625/-
Ex.P.159(a) Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.160 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 12.4.2008 for Rs.87,975/-
Ex.P.160(a) Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.161 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 15.4.2008 for Rs.22,697/-
Ex.P.161(a) Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.162 Kanaga Poultry Service Invoice dt. 29.4.2008 for Rs.1,12,500/-
Ex.P.162(a) Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.163 9 self cheques issued by B. Dadapeer and 2 Debit vouchers Ex.P.164 Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.28 B. Dadapeer Ex.P.165 Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.28 B. Dadapeer Ex.P.166 Copy of Revised Estimation dt. 7.5.2008 issued by Sri. Nagaraj to the Senior Manager, Vijaya Bank, Yalahanka Branch (available in Ex.P.388 marked through PW.29 on 13.10.14) Ex.P.167 Receipt dated 25.12.2007 for Rs.7,95,750/- of Ramco Industries Ex.P.167(a) Signature of PW.30 Ex.P.168 Statement of account in respect of Sri Sai Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 222 Poultry Breeding Farm maintained by Ramco Industries Ex.P.168(a) Signature of PW.30 Ex.P.168(b) Signature of PW.30 Ex.P.169 12 copies of Invoices of M/s. Ramco Industries favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P.169(a) Signature of PW.30 Ex.P.169(b) Signature of PW.30 Ex.P.170 Statement of account of M/s. Ramco Industries Ex.P.170(a) Relevant entry at page-17 Ex.P.171 10 Tax Invoices and enclosures of M/s. Vijeet Steels issued in favour of Sri Sai Poultry Ex.P.172 Account opening form and enclosures of M/s.
Vijeet Steels bearing A/c. No. 1772 at Canara Bank, Mahalakshmi Layout Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.173 7 cheques issued by M/s. Vijeet Steels favouring Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P.174 4 cheques issued by M/s. Vijeet Steels favouring Sri Dadapeer Ex.P.175 Statement of account of Vijeet Steels from 1.1.2006 to 27.8.2012 in respect of A/c. No.1772 of Canara Bank.
Ex.P.175(a) Signature of Branch Manager in Certificate Ex.P.176 Axis Bank cheque dt. 26.2.2008 for Rs.3,50,000/- favouring Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P.176(a) Signature of Authorised Signatory Ex.P.177 Statement of account of Vinayaka & Co., from 1.1.2007 to 31.12.2007 in respect of A/c. No.1144 of Axis Bank.
Ex.P.177(a) Relevant entry at page No.14 Ex.P.178 16 copies of Invoices of Vinayaka & Co., Ex.P.178(a) Signature of PW.33 & (b) Ex.P.179 Ledger Account of Vinayaka & Co., (2008-09) in respect of Sri Sai Enterprises Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 223 Ex.P.179(a) Signature of PW.33 & (b) Ex.P.180 True copy of VAT Registration Certificate pertaining to M/s Aryan Iron & Steel Co., Ex.P.181 IDBI Bank letter dt. 22.6.2006 to Karnataka Bank Ex.P.182 M/s. Aryan Pipes cheque dt. 3.10.2007 for Rs.3,00,000/- favouring Sri Vigneswara Traders.
Ex.P.183 Statement of Account of Aryan Pipes maintained in Karnataka Bank for A/c. No. 33901 Ex.P.183(a) Relevant entry at page2 Ex.P.184 Aryan Iron & Steel cheques issued in favour to 189 of A2 & Sri Vigneswara Traders Ex.P.190 Statement of Account of M/s. Aryan Pipes maintained in Karnataka Bank for A/c. No. ....51901 Ex.P.190(a) Relevant entries to (f) Ex.P.191 Copy of account opening form of Syndicate Bank, Rajaji Nagar Branch A/c. No. ...7208 with enclosures.
Ex.P.192 Statement of account from 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2012 of Syndicate Bank, Rajaji Nagar Branch A/c. No. ...7208 in respect of M/s. Sai Poultry. Ex.P.193 20 Syndicate Bank cheques issued by A2 Ex.P.194 21 Syndicate Bank credit vouchers of different dates and amount Ex.P.195 Statement of account from 22.8.2005 to 22.8.2012 of ING Vysya Bank, S.S. Nagar Branch A/c. No. ...6179 in respect of M/s. Vigneswara Traders.
Ex.P.196 3 ING Vysya Bank, S.S. Nagar Branch self to 198 cheques issued by Vigneshwara Traders Ex.P.199 Statement of account from 31.8.2005 to 22.8.2012 of Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 224 ING Vysya Bank, S.S. Nagar Branch A/c. No. ...939 in respect of A2.
Ex.P200 Original Account opening form of M/s.
Vinayaka Enterprises and enclosures Ex.P200(a) Signature of PW.44 Ex.P201 8 Canara Bank self cheques and 1 cheque favouring Ramanuja issued by Sri Vinayaka Enterprises.
Ex.P202 2 Debit Vouchers dt. 14.2.2008 and 21.4.2008.
Ex.P203 7 credit vouchers of M/s. Vinayaka Enterprises Ex.P204 Statement of account of M/s. Vinayaka Enterprises in respect of A/c. No. ...... 0654 along with certificate.
Ex.P205 & Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.40/ 206 CW39 Ex.P207 Receipt Memo dt. 8.8.2012 Ex.P207(a) Signature of PW.41 Ex.P207(b) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P208 Receipt Memo dt. 31.8.2012 Ex.P208(a) Signature of PW.41 Ex.P208(b) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P209 Vijaya Bank DD dt. 1.12.2007 for
Rs.10,66,480/- favouring M/s. Vijeeth Steels Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 225 Ex.P210 Vijaya Bank DD dt. 20.12.2007 for Rs.6,60,163/- favouring M/s. Kanaga Poultry Services Ex.P211 Original Partition Deed dt. 8.12.2006 executed between A2 and his brothers.
Ex.P211(a) Signature of PW.42 Ex.P212 Original Mortgage Deed dt. 3.12.2008 executed between T. Rajanna and others and Bank of India Ex.P213 Original Partition Deed dt. 8.12.2006 executed between A2 and his brothers.
Ex.P214 Specimen Signatures of PW.42 in 8 sheets marked as S24 to S31 Ex.P215 Receipt Memo dt. 13.9.2012 Ex.P215(a) Signature of PW.43 Ex.P215(b) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P216 Certified Extract of Descriptive Index of 2002- 03 and 2003-04 Ex.P216(a) Relevant entry in page No.4 Ex.P217 Certified copy of Simple Mortgage Deed dt.
17.6.2003 executed by T. Rajanna.
Ex.P218 Certified copy of Partition Deed dt. 8.12.2006 between T. Rajanna and his brothers. Ex.P219 Certified copy of Sale Deed dt. 7.7.2008 between Ananda Pillay and Abhishek Patil.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 226 Ex.P220 Original Search Application Register for the period 16.11.2006 to 5.10.2007.
Ex.P221 Vijaya Bank Pay-in-slip dt. 16.1.2008 Ex.P222 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.
19.2.2007 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount.
Ex.P222(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Shetty Ex.P223 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.
10.3.2008 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount.
Ex.P223(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Shetty Ex.P224 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.
23.3.2008 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount.
Ex.P224(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Shetty Ex.P225 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.20.4.2008 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount. Ex.P225(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Shetty Ex.P226 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.
29.4.2008 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount.
Ex.P226(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 227 Shetty Ex.P227 Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Letter dt.
11.5.2008 addressed to The Manager, Vijaya Bank for release of loan amount.
Ex.P227(a) Endorsement by Senior Manager Seetharam Shetty Ex.P228 Original Vijaya Bank Current A/c Opening Form in the name of A2, A/c. No. 650.
Ex.P228(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P228(b) Signature of Branch Manager Shyam Shetty Ex.P229 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 20.8.2007 for Rs.30,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P229(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P230 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 5.11.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P230(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P231 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt.
12.11.2007 for Rs.2,85,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P231(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P232 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt.
19.11.2007 for Rs.4,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P232(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P233 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt.
24.11.2007 for Rs.3,00,000/- issued by A2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 228 Ex.P233(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P234 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 8.12.2007 for Rs.3,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P234(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P235 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt.
13.12.2007 for Rs.45,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P235(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P236 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt.
31.12.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P236(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P237 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 2..1.2008 for Rs.4,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P237(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P238 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 5.1.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P238(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P239 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 9.1.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P239(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P240 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 10.1.2008 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P240(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P241 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 17.1.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/- issued by A2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 229 Ex.P241(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P242 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 20.1.2008 for Rs.37,500/- issued by A2 Ex.P242(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P243 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 1.2.2008 for Rs.1,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P243(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P244 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 4.2.2008 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P244(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P245 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 6.2.2008 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P245(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P246 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 6.2.2008 for Rs.1,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P246(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P247 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 12.2.2008 for Rs.60,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P247(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P248 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 20.2.2008 for Rs.50,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P248(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P249 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 29.2.2008 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 230 for Rs.1,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P249(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P250 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 3.3.2008 for Rs.1,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P250(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P251 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 10.3.2008 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P251(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P252 Syndicate Bank Original cheque dt. 26.4.2008 for Rs.40,000/- issued by A2 Ex.P252(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P253 ING Vysya Bank Customer Information Form of Sri. Vignesh Traders Ex.P253(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P254 ING Vysya Bank Customer Information Form of A2 Ex.P254(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P255 Form No.60 given by A2 Ex.P255(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P256 NIACL Nomination Form given by A2 Ex.P256(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P257 Declaration letter dt. 3.8.2008 given by A2 to ING Vysya Bank.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
231
Ex.P257(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P258 Form No.60 given by A2
Ex.P258(a) Signature of A2
(b)
Ex.P259 ING Vysya Bank Cheque dt.5.9.2007 for
Rs.2,00,000/-
Ex.P259(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P260 ING Vysya Bank Cheque dt.6.9.2007 for
Rs.1,25,000/-
Ex.P260(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P261 ING Vysya Bank Cheque dt.7.9.2007 for
Rs.50,000/-
Ex.P261(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P262 ING Vysya Bank Cheque dt.8.9.2007 for
Rs.3,25,000/-
Ex.P262(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P263 ING Vysya Bank Cheque dt.12.9.2007 for
Rs.64,000/-
Ex.P263(a) Signature of A2
Ex.P264 Certified copy of Memorandum of Deposit of
Title Deeds dt. 23.8.2007 from A2 and others favouring Vijaya Bank Ex.P265 Certified copy of Sale Deed dt. 11.6.2008 favouring Vijaya Bank Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 232 Ex.P266 EC in respect of Sy. No.43, Itagalpura village Ex.P267 EC in respect of Sy. No.39/2, Itagalpura village Ex.P268 Certified copy of Simple Mortgage Deed dt.
6.8.2008 by Sri. Muniraju Ex.P269 Certified copy of Descriptive Index for the period from 20.8.2007 to 31.8.2007 Ex.P269(a) Relevant entry in Page. No.15 Ex.P270 Certified copy of Descriptive Index for the period from 2008-09 Ex.P270(a) Relevant entry in Page No.6 Ex.P271 E.C. in respect of Sy. No.43 of Itagalpura village Ex.P271(a) Signature of PW.46 Ex.P272 E.C. in respect of Sy. No.39 of Itagallapura village Ex.P272(a) Signature of PW.46 Ex.P273 to 6 HDFC Bank Cheques issued by M/s. 278 Vijeeth Steels favouring Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm Ex.P279 Certified copy of Account opening form with annexure of M/s. Sri Sai Poultry Breeding Farm with ICICI Bank Ex.P280 Certified copy of ICICI Bank Statement of account in respect of Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 233 Farm for A/c. No. .... 655.
Ex.P281 Certified Screen Shot print outs of RTGS transactions pertaining to A/c. No. ..... 655 of M/s. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm from 9/2008 to 8/2010 along with certificate. Ex.P282 ICICI Bank Pay-in-slip dt. 24.8.2010 for Rs.1,05,000/-
Ex.P283 ICICI Bank Pay-in-slip dt. 8.11.2010 for Rs.50,000/-
Ex.P284 to 81 Self Cheques of ICICI Bank issued by A2 364 showing withdrawals from the A/c. No. .. 655 Ex.P365 Specimen Signature Card in respect of A/c.
No. .... 192 of M/s. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm with Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch. Ex.P366 Current Account opening form in respect of A/c. No. .... 192 of M/s. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm with Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch. Ex.P367 Specimen Signature Card in respect of A/c.
No. .... 193 of M/s. Sai Teja Poultry Enterprises with Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch.
Ex.P368 Current Account opening form in respect of A/c. No. .... 193 of M/s. Sai Teja Poultry Enterprises with Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch.
Ex.P369 Bank of India Borrower/Guarantor Profile given by A2 Ex.P370 Bank of India Borrower's/ Guarantor's Profile of Smt. Sarvamangala wife of A2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 234 Ex.P371 Letter dt. 13.7.2009 submitted by A2 to Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch requesting for longer repayment period.
Ex.P372 Letter dt. 14.7.2009 contains signature of A2 to Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch requesting for longer repayment period. Ex.P373 Stock Statement dt. 26.11.2008 of M/s. Sri Sai Teja Poultry Enterprises.
Ex.P374 Certified copies of loan documents pertaining to A2 and his wife with Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch total 64 sheets.
Ex.P375 Original Legal Scrutiny Report dt. 24.11.2008 submitted by Sri. T.S. Venkatesh, Advocate to Bank of India, V.V. Puram Branch in respect of Sy. No.39 and 43 of Itagallapura village. Ex.P376 to 3 Encumbrance Certificates pertaining to Sy. 378 No.39 and 43 of Itagallapura village. Ex.P379 to 2 Valuation Reports submitted by N. 380 Venkatesh, Approved Valuer pertaining to Sy.
No.39 and 43 of Itagallapura village and Plant & Machineries.
Ex.P381 Search Lists dt. 24.2.2012 Ex.P381(a) Signature of PW.51 Ex.P381(b) Signature of PW.52 Ex.P381(c) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P382 Cash Bill Book of M/s. Lakshmiranganatha Cement & Hardware Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 235 Ex.P383 One file containing the copies of property documents pertaining to Sy. No.39 and 43 of Itagallapura village.
Ex.P384 One file containing correspondence letters and reports etc., of A2 Ex.P385 Cash Bill Book of M/s. Lakshmiranganatha Cement & Hardware - Book No.3.
Ex.P386 Investment on material Register of Sri. Sai Poultry.
Ex.P387 One file containing legal scrutiny report, copies ECs, copies of Account Statements etc., related to A2 Ex.P388 One Book contains copies of L.S.R., Valuation Reports etc., Ex.P389 One Book contains copies of Estimation etc., Ex.P390 One file containing estimate of the project Ex.P391 One file containing Account statement pertaining to various banks and tax returns.
Ex.P392 Search List
Ex.P392(a) Signature of PW.53
Ex.P393 One long note book pertaining to Sri. Sai
Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg
production and sales from 8.6.2008 to 29.3.2009.
Ex.P394 One long note book pertaining to Sri. Sai
Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J
236
production from 22.4.2008 to 18.3.2009.
Ex.P395 One long note book pertaining to Sri. Sai
Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg
production from 5.8.2008 to 27.11.2008.
Ex.P396 One long note book pertaining to Sri. Sai
Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg
production from 1.7.2008 to 5.8.2008. Ex.P397 One Note Book pertaining to Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg production from 26.6.2008 to 3.9.2008.
Ex.P398 One Note Book pertaining to Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm showing egg production from 6.9.2008 to 6.11.2008.
Ex.P399 One Note Book pertaining to Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm showing the poulty and constructions works account.
Ex.P400 One Note Book showing transportation details from 1.11.2008 to 11.11. 2008.
Ex.P401 One file contains cash bills, delivery challans etc., towards purchase of poultry medicines/ feeds etc., Ex.P402 Certified copies of loan documents of Accused No.2 pertaining to grape garden loan Ex.P402(A) Certified copy of Guarantee Deed dt.
18.6.2003 Ex.P402(b) Certified copy of Revival Letter dt. 10.6.2006 Ex.P402(c) Certified copy of Confirmation Letter dt.
10.6.2006 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 237 Ex.P403 Egg received and setting book for the period 21.10.2007 to 2.12.2012 Ex.P404 Cheque dt. 13.7.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.1,51,225/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P404(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P405 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 13.7.2009 to Ex.P404.
Ex.P406 Cheque dt. 21.7.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.1,62,367/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P406(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P407 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 21.7.2009 to Ex.P406.
Ex.P408 Cheque dt. 28.7.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,24,710/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P408(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P409 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 28.7.2009 to Ex.P408.
Ex.P410 Cheque dt. 4.8.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.2,18,712/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P410(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P411 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 4.8.2009 to Ex.P410.
Ex.P412 Cheque dt. 12.8.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,02,317/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 238 Ex.P412(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P413 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 12.8.2009 to Ex.P412.
Ex.P414 Cheque dt. 19.8.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,02,157/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P414(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P415 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 19.8.2009 to Ex.P414.
Ex.P416 Cheque dt. 26.8.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.1,51,146/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P416(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P417 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 26.8.2009 to Ex.P416.
Ex.P418 Cheque dt. 2.9.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.1,45,548/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P418(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P419 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 2.9.2009 to Ex.P418.
Ex.P420 Cheque dt. 8.9.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.2,91,121/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P420(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P421 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 8.9.2009 to Ex.P420.
Ex.P422 Cheque dt. 16.9.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.2,91,121/- favouring Sri. Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 239 Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P422(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P423 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 16.9.2009 to Ex.P422.
Ex.P424 Cheque dt. 24.9.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.2,98,000/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P424(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P425 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 24.9.2009 to Ex.P424.
Ex.P426 Cheque dt. 1.10.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,13,513/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P426(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P427 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 1.10.2009 to Ex.P426.
Ex.P428 Cheque dt. 7.10.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,15,905/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P428(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P429 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 7.10.2009 to Ex.P428.
Ex.P430 Cheque dt. 14.10.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,27,101/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P430(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P431 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 14.10.2009 to Ex.P430.
Ex.P432 Cheque dt. 21.10.2009 issued by Pooja Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 240 Hatcheries for Rs.3,38,297/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P432(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P433 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 21.10.2009 to Ex.P432.
Ex.P434 Cheque dt. 28.10.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,38,297/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P434(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P435 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 28.10.2009 to Ex.P434.
Ex.P436 Cheque dt. 2.11.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,31,847/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P436(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P437 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 2.11.2009 to Ex.P436.
Ex.P438 Cheque dt. 11.11.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,38,297/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P438(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P439 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 11.11.2009 to Ex.P438.
Ex.P440 Cheque dt. 18.11.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.3,38,297/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P440(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P441 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 18.11.2009 to Ex.P440.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 241 Ex.P442 Cheque dt. 3.12.2009 issued by Pooja Hatcheries for Rs.2,00,000/- favouring Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P442(a) Signature of PW.57 Ex.P443 Corresponding NEFT Form dt. 3.12.2009 to Ex.P442.
Ex.P444 Letter dt. 27.12.2012 of HDFC Bank to the CBI Ex.P444(a) Signature of PW.59 Ex.P445 Transaction Statement of HDFC Bank Ex.P446 Statement of account in respect of Raja Hatcheries Ex.P447 Ledger for the year 2008-09 of Sri. Srinivasa Poultry Breeding Farm.
Ex.P447(a) Relevant entry dt. 22.8.2008 Ex.P447(b) Relevant entry dt. 4.9.2008 Ex.P447(c) Relevant entry dt. 9.9.2008 Ex.P447(d) Relevant entry dt. 16.9.2008 Ex.P447(e) Relevant entry dt. 23.9.2008 Ex.P447(f) Relevant entry dt. 7.10.2008 Ex.P447(g) Relevant entry dt. 11.10.2008 Ex.P447(h) Relevant entry dt. 21.10.2008 Ex.P447(i) Relevant entry dt. 22.10.2008 Ex.P447(j) Relevant entry dt. 30.10.2008 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 242 Ex.P447(k) Relevant entry dt. 31.10.2008 Ex.P447(l) Relevant entry dt. 20.11.2008 Ex.P448 Statement of account in respect of SB A/c. No. 9039 of A1 Ex.P448(a) Certificate u/s 2A of BBE Act Ex.P448(b) Relevant entry dt. 21.4.2007 for Rs.5,00,000/-
Ex.P448(c) Relevant entry dt. 24.4.2007 for Rs.2,00,000/-
Ex.P449 Covering letter dt. 22.8.2013 of the Director CFSL, Hyderabad Ex.P450 Expert's Opinion/ Report dated 19.8.2013 Ex.P450(a) Signature of PW.63 in page-6 Ex.P450(b) Signature of PW.63 in page-2 Ex.P450(c) Signature of C. Rajesh, Co-examiner Ex.P451 Original documents also marked as Q192 to Q215 Ex.P452 Specimen Signatures and Handwritings of A2 (S1 to S23) Ex.P453 FIR Ex.P453(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P454 Receipt Memo dt. 19.3.2012 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 243 Ex.P454(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P455 Receipt Memo dt. 20.3.2012 Ex.P455(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P456 Search List dt. 23.12.2012 Ex.P456(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P457 Inventory dt. 23.4.2012 Ex.P457(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P458 Proceedings dt. 23.4.2012 Ex.P459 Receipt memo dt. 28.5.2012 Ex.P459(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P460 Receipt memo dt. 18.5.2012 Ex.P460(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P461 Receipt memo dt. 1.6.2012 Ex.P461(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P462 Receipt memo dt. 9.7.2012 Ex.P462(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P463 Receipt memo dt. 20.7.2012 Ex.P463(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P464 Receipt memo dt. 31.7.2012 Ex.P464(a) Signature of PW.64 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 244 Ex.P465 Receipt memo dt. 2.8.2012 Ex.P465(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P466 Receipt memo dt. 2.8.2012 Ex.P466(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P467 Receipt memo dt. 3.8.2012 Ex.P467(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P468 Receipt memo dt. 8.8.2012 Ex.P468(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P469 Receipt memo dt. 27.8.2012 Ex.P469(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P470 Receipt memo dt. 29.8.2012 Ex.P470(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P471 Receipt memo dt. 31.8.2012 Ex.P471(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P472 Receipt memo dt. 5.9.2012 Ex.P472(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P473 Receipt memo dt. 13.9.2012 Ex.P473(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P474 Receipt memo dt. 20.9.2012 Ex.P474(a) Signature of PW.64 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 245 Ex.P475 ICICI Bank Letter dt. 27.9.2012 Ex.P475(a) Endorsement and Signature of PW.64 Ex.P476 Receipt memo dt. 28.9.2012 Ex.P476(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P477 Receipt memo dt. 17.10.2012 Ex.P477(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P478 Receipt memo dt. 31.10.2012 Ex.P478(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P479 Receipt memo dt. 12.12.2012 Ex.P479(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P480 Receipt memo dt. 18.12.2012 Ex.P480(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P481 Receipt memo dt. 4.1.2013 Ex.P481(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P482 Receipt memo dt. 4.11.2013 Ex.P482(a) Signature of PW.64 Ex.P483 Loan documents deposited by A2 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 246 LIST OF EXHIBITED DOCUMENTS FOR DEFENCE:
Ex.D1 Attested copy of letter dated 23/5/2008 Ex.D2 Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.16/CW.14 Ex.D3 Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.16/CW.14 Ex.D4 Relevant portion of 161 statement of PW.16/CW.14 Ex.D5 Trading and profit and loss account for the year ended 31.3.2009 of Sri. Sai Poultry Breeding Farm.
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 247 LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS EXIBITED FOR PROSECUTION M.O.1 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI SAI POULTRY BREEDING FARM, #721, 61st Cross, 5th Block, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560 010. PH: 23400532 MOB:
9880672296, 9901990825"
M.O.2 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI SAI TEJ POULTRY ENTERPRISES, #721, 61st Cross, 5th Block, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560 010. PH: 23400532 MOB: 9880672296, 9901990825"
M.O.3 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI SAI TEJ POULTRY ENTERPRISES ...., Managing Partner".
M.O.4 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "Proprietor".
M.O.5 One oval shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI SAI TEJ POULTRY ENTERPRISES, #721, 61st Cross, 5th Block, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560 010, MOB: 9880672296, 9901990825, 9342308022, 9845585169".
M.O.6 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI SAI POULTRY BREEDING FARM, Authorised Signatory".
M.O.7 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "For SRI VIGNESHWARA TRADERS".
M.O.8 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "For SRI VIGNESHWARA TRADERS, Authorised Signatory".
Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 248 M.O.9 One round shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "M/s SRI VIGNESHWARA TRADERS, Bangalore-560 064, Kariyappa Building, Doddaballapura Road, Rajankunte".
M.O.10 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "Managing ..... Partner".
M.O.11 One round shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SAI POULTRY BREEDING FARM, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560 010".
M.O.12 One round shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SAI POULTRY BREEDING FARM, Ittagalpura, Bangalore-560 064".
M.O.13 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI VINAYAKA ENTERPRISES, ARISHINAKUNTE & POST, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE-562123".
M.O.14 One round shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI VINAYAKA ENTERPRISES, BANGALORE".
M.O.15 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "TIN:29420486333"
M.O.16 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SRI VINAYAKA ENTERPRISES .... Managing Partner".
M.O.17 One round shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "SAI POULTRY BREEDING FARM, ITTAGALPURA VILLAGE, RAJANUKUNTE POST, BANGALORE-560 064. Off: #721, 61st Cross, 5th Block, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560010, PH:23400532 Spl.C.C.No.80/2013 J 249 MOB:9880672296, 9901990825".
M.O.18 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp (self inking) having inscription in Kannada as "SRI LAKSHMI RANGANATHA CEMENT & HARDWARES, 6/3, DIBBUR BUS STAND, KAKOLU ROAD, BANGALORE (NORTH-TALUK), BANGALORE-DISTRICT".
M.O.19 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "For Choice Breeding Farm ... Authorised Signatory".
M.O.20 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "TIN:29720373842"
M.O.21 One rectangle shaped rubber stamp having inscription as "For NAGARAJ. R.....Proprietor"
(Sadashiva S. Sultanpuri) XXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, and Prl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bangalore.