Madras High Court
State Rep. By vs / on 14 December, 2012
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 10.07.2023 Pronounced on: 09.08.2023
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Criminal Appeal Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
Crl.A.No.434 of 2013
State Rep. by
Inspector of Police,
CBI/ACB/Chennai. ... Appellant/Complainant
/versus/
1. Shri.G.Chandrasekar, (died on 11.04.2019)
S/o.R.Gurusamy,
the then Traffic Manager,
Madras Port Trust, Madras,
r/o.No.17, Karpagam Avenue,
R.A.Puram, Madras – 28.
2. Smt.Krishnaveni,
W/o.Shri G.Chandrasekar (A-1),
r/o No.17, Karpagam Avenue,
R.A.Puram, Madras – 28.
3. Miss.Padmini,
D/o.Shri Kandan,
the then Manager, Punjab National Bank,
Teynampet, Madras – 18.
r/o No.8, Sri Durga Apartments.
4. Shri C.Mahadevan, S/o.Shri Chandrasekar (A-1).
r/o No.17, Karpagam Avenue,
R.A.Puram, Madras – 28.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
5. Smt.C.Shobana, D/o.Shri Chandrasekar,
r/o No.17, Karpagam Avenue,
R.A.Puram, Madras – 28.
6. Shri K.Chakravarthy,
S/o.Shri Kesavan,
r/o No.279, Nehru Nagar, Madras – 96.
7. Smt.Meena Vaikunth,
W/o. Lt.Col.Vaikunth,
T.Nagar, Madras -17.
8. Smt.M.Subbulakshmi, (died on 03.01.2015)
W/o.P.Mahadevan,
r/o No.17, Karpagam Avenue,
R.A. Puram, Madras – 28. ... Respondent/Accused
Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. 1973,
pleased to set aside the judgment dated 14.12.2012 pronounced by IX
Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai in C.C.No.23 of 1997 and
allow this appeal and pass such other orders which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the above case.
For Appellant : Mr.Hardesh Goswami,
Public Prosecutor (C.B.I)
For R1, R2, R4 to R8 : Mr.B.Kumar, Senior Counsel,
for Mr.S.Anbalagan
For R3 : Mr.S.Anbalagan
R1 & R8 : died
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
Crl.A.No.468 of 2013
K.Chakravarthy,
S/o.late. Venugopal Kesavan,
No.11, 2nd Cross Street,
Radhakrishna Nagar,
Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600 041. ... Appellant/Accused No.6
/versus/
Deputy Superintendent of Police,
SPE, CBI, ACB, Chennai.
(R.C.Nos.38 & 84/86) ... Respondent/Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 454 of Cr.P.C., pleased
to call for the records in C.C.No.23 of 1997 on the file of the IX Additional
Special Judge for CBI Cases, IX Additional City Civil Court, Chennai – 600
104 and set aside the judgment and order dated 14.12.2012 so for it relate to the
disposal of the cash and jewelleries recovered from locker Nos.378 and 385 of
Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar Branch under the search list, Ex.P.1263 and to
pass any such other other as deem it and proper in the circumstances of the
case.
For Appellant : Mr.B.Kumar, Senior Counsel,
for Mr.S.Anbalagan
For Respondent : Mr.Hardesh Goswami,
Public Prosecutor (C.B.I)
****
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
COMMON JUDGMENT
The case of disproportionate assets held by a Public Servant, probed by C.B.I ended in acquittal. Being aggrieved by the order of the trial Court, the Appeal against acquittal is filed by State/C.B.I.
2. Incidentally, some of the properties seized from the Bank lockers such as currency and jewelleries were ordered to be confiscated to the State is challenged by one of the accused (A-6), who claim ownership over the properties.
3. The name of the accused with their rankings are as below:-
A-1 G.Chandrasekar is the Public Servant.
A-2 C.Krishnaveni is wife of A-1.
A-3 Miss.R.S.Padmini is the Manager of Punjab National Bank, Teynampet Branch, who known to the members of A-1 family.
A-4 C.Mahadevan is son of A-1 & A-2.
A-5 C.Shobana is the daughter of A1 & A2.
A-6 K.Chakravarthy, a relative of A-1.
A-7 Mrs.Meena Vaikunth is sister of A-1.
A-8 P.Mahadevan is father-in-law of A-1.
A-9 M.Subbulakshmi is mother-in-law of A-1.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
4. The case of the prosecution in short is that, A-1 G.Chandrasekar, a Public Servant, while serving in Madras Port Trust, during the check period from 01.01.1974 to 05.09.1986 in various capacity had accumulated wealth disproportionate to his known source of income. He had invested the money in the name of his wife, Children, Mother-in-law and father-in-law. Accounts in the name of family members were opened with the help of A-3, the Manager of Punjab National Bank, Teynampet Branch. The lockers were opened by A-2 (Smt.Krishnaveni) and A-7 (Meena Vaikunth) in different names to conceal the properties. The money and jewels were stealthily removed from A-2 Smt.Krishnaveni's locker and kept in A-7 Smt.Meena Vaikunth locker to screen the ill-gotten money. A-6 (K.Chakravarthy) falsely made claim over the property seized from the locker as if, it belongs to him.
5. One Rajagopalan, who was close associate of A-1 turned Approver and he had disclosed the factum how the assets possessed disproportionately to the known source of income been invested in various names by impersonation, forgery and use of forged documents as genuine. _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.5/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
6. The list of Annexures:- A to F filed along with the final report provides an birds eye view of the prosecution case, hence extracted below:-
Assets held by Shri G.Chandrasekar (A1) at the beginning of Check period as on 01.01.1974 Details Value A. Immovable Assets:
(1) (1) Plot No.11, Karpagam Avenue, R.A.Puram Madras-28 purchased Rs.20,251.00 in 1973 and the amount paid before 31.12.1973 (Document registered in 1974) D-1035/37) (2) Plot No.98, K.K.Nagar, Madras-78, allotted by Tamil Nadu Housing Rs.13,434.20 Board amount paid till 31.12.1973 B. Movable Assets:
(3) New Ambassador Car No.TMC 3975 purchased from M/s.Reliance Rs. 24,378.50 Motors, Madras in September, 1971 (Document No.1035/77) C. Bank Deposits & Balances:
(4) Balance in SB account No.H.170 with SBI, Harbour Sub-Office, Rs. 21.05 Madras-1 as on 31.12.1973.
(5) Balance in current account No.14 with SBI, Harbour Sub Office, Rs.90.02 Madras-1 on 31.12.1973.
D. LTC & Securities:
(6) LIC premium paid for Policy No.43104 531 held in the name of Rs.11,437.60
Shri.G.Chandrasekaran till 31.12.1973.
(7) LIC premium paid for Policy No.11055425 held in the name of Rs.2,463.97
Shri.G.Chandrasekaran till 31.12.1973 in 53 instalments.
E. Household Articles. Cash & Jewelleries:
(As per inventories on 27.6.86)
8. Household articles found at No.10, Spring Haven Road Madras-1 as on 01.01.1974
(i) Furniture Rs.2,235,00
(ii) Electrical Gadgets Rs. 100.00
(iii) Other articles Rs.1,500.00 Total Rs.3,835.00
(iv) Jewelleries consisting of gold bangles, chains, neck-lace, etc. totalling to 28 sovereigns were found on the date of inventory. (They were _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.6/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Details Value neither included as on 01.01.1974 nor as on 05.09.1986 as the value could not be ascertained due to lack of information for the date of acquirement and G.Chandrasekar claimed as acquired prior to 01.01.1974).
9. Household articles found at No.1, Karpagam Avenue, Madras-28 as on 27.08.1986.
(i). Godrej Almirah Rs.300.00
(ii). Jewellery found in the almirah of Mrs.Krishnaveni totalling to 202 grams on the date of inventory prepared on 27.06.1986 (was not taken into account as they are considered to be acquired prior to check period) Total Rs.76,211.34 Interest Income earned during the check period by Shri.G.Chandrasekar, A1 from various Banks Deposits/SB Accounts.
Sl. Details Rupees
No.
1. From Deposits of Rs.52,000/- on 20.10.82 matured on 20.10.85 in the 17,940.00
name of Sh.G.Chandrasekar with IOB Santhome, Madras.
2. From SB A/c No.8236 with IOB Santhome, Madras the names of 9,412.50 Shri.G.Chandrasekar and Mrs.Krishna Veni during the period from 12.12.78 to 5.9.86.
3. From Deposit of Rs.50,000/- on 6.3.85 in the names of Shri G.Kannan 4,997.35 & Mrs. Krishna with Canara Bank, Abiramapuram, Madras.
4. From deposit of Rs.50,000/- dt.6.3.85 in the names of 4,691.40 Shri.G.Chandrasekar and Veni Chandrasekar with Dena Bank. Alwarpet, Madras-18.
5. From FDR of Rs.50,000/- dt.6.3.85 in the names of 4,895.00 Sh.G.Chandrasekar and Mrs.Veni Chandrasekar with Indian Bank, R.A.Puram, Madras.
6. From FDR of Rs.25,000/- dt.8.10.80 in the name of Miss Lavanya 16,805.00 with Union Bank of India, Chamiers Road, Madras.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
Sl. Details Rupees
No.
7. From deposit of Rs.22,000/- on 20.10.82 in the names of Mrs.Krishna 9,157.25
veni, Sekar and Shri.Mahadevan with Syndicate Bank, T.Nagar, Madras-17 and preclosed on 17.7.86 and issued pay order for Rs.31,167.25.
8. From deposit of Rs.40,000/- dt. 23.2.85 in the names of Mrs.Krishna- Rs.4,380.30 veni and Mahadevan with S.B. of Bikanier & Jaipur, Madras-5 and pre-closed dt.16.7.86 and Pay order issued for Rs.44,380,30.
9. From deposit of Rs.25,000/- on 20.10.82 in the names of Mrs.Krishna 10,406.30 sekhar and Lavanya with Bank of India, Mylapore - Renewed on 21.10.85 and pre-closed on 17.7.86 pay order issued for Rs.35,406.30.
10. From deposit of Rs.20,000/- on 7.9.80 in the names of Mrs. C.K.Veni 13,702.50 and Mahadevan with Canara Bank, Mylapore and pre-closed on 17.7.86, Pay order issued for B.33,702.50
11. From deposit of Rs.40,000/- on 23.2.85 in the names of Mrs. Krishna- 4,112.17 veni and C.Mahadevan with Indian Bank, Alwarpet, Madras and preclosed on 19.7.86, pay order issued for Rs.44,112.17
12. From deposit of Rs.40,000/- on 25.2.85 in the names of Mrs. Krishna- 4,068.80 veni and Shri.C.Mahadevan with Indian Bank, East Abiramapuram, Madras pre- closed on 17.7.86. Pay order for Rs.44,069,80.
13. From deposit of Rs.40,000/- on 23.2.85 in the names of Mrs.Krishna 4,091.90 Veni and Sh.C.Mahadevan with Bank of Baroda, Mylapore, Madras-
4. Pre-closed on 16.7.86. Pay order issued for Rs.44,091.90
14. From deposit of Rs. 40,000/- on 23.2.85 in the names of 4,100.30 Shri.C.Mahadevan and Mrs.Krishnaveni with Central Bank of India, Mylapore, Madras-4. Pre-closed on 17.7.86. Pay order issued for Rs.44,100.30.
15. From deposit of Rs.25,000/- on 8.10.80 in the names of Mrs. Krishna 16,825.65 and Miss Lavanya with Bank of Baroda, R.K.Nagar, Madras-28, pre- closed on 19.7.86, Pay Order issued for Rs.41,825.65.
16. From deposit of Rs.3,000/- on 23.1.78 in the name of 3,000.00 Mrs.Krishnaveni, Sekar with M.P.T.employees Cooperative Bank, Madras. Matured on 23.5.84 for Rs.6,000/-.
17. From deposit of Rs.33,000/- on 7.8.78 in the name of Shri 19,668.00 G.Chandrasekar with Bank of Maharashtra, Madras-1 Matured on 7.1.83 for Rs.52,668/-.
18. From SB A/c No.2339 in the name of Shri G.Chandrasekar with Bank 608.55 of Maharashtra, Broadway, Madras-1 from 30.1.78 to 07.07.1986 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.8/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Sl. Details Rupees No.
19. From CDs A/c No.518 in the name of Shri G.Chandrasekar for the 4,163.00 period from 29.3.75 to 5.9.86 with Bank of Maharashtra, Madras-1.
20. From FDR of Rs.58,130/- dt.14.11.83 in the names of 13,575.60 Sh.G.Chandrasekar and Mrs. Krishnaveni with Andhra Bank, Mylapore, pre-closed on 8.7.86. Pay order issued for Rs.71,705.80.
21. From RD A/c No.2546 in the name of Mrs.Krishnaveni Chandrasekar 3,526.65 opened on 12.4.84, pre-closed on 8.7.86 with Andhra Bank Mylapore. Pay order issued for Rs.44,026.65 against monthly instalment, totalling Rs.40,500.
22. From S.B.A/c No.8629 in the name of Mrs Krishnaveni with Andhra 294.90 Bank, Mylapore. A/c opened on 22.5.84 and closed on 22.7.86
23. From SB A/c No.7257 in the name of Mrs.Krishnaveni with Andhra 18,10 Bank, Mylapore A/c opened on 3.11.80 closed on 23.7.84.
24. From FDR No.124609 dt.7.11.84 for Rs.10,000/- in the name of 1,227.72 Sh.G.Chandrasekar with Vysya Bank, Mylapore, preclosed on 7.7.86
25. From SB A/c No.849 in the name of Sh.G.Chandrasekar with Vysya 8,390.31 Bank, Mylapore, Madras from 11.11.82 to 7.7.86 and interest earned from FDR No.343951 for Rs.25,000/- & 343847 for Rs.15,000/- credited into SB A/c No.849.
26. From SB A/c No.3743 in the name of Shri.G.Chandrasekar with 121.81 P.N.B. Washermanpet, Madras from 16.6.80 to 17.6.86
27. From FDR No.6/65 dt.5.5.81 for Rs.25,000/- in the names of 14,919.65 R.G.Kannan & Mrs.R.G.Kannan with Central Bank of India, Coimbatore pre-closed on 8.8.86 for Rs.39,919.65
28. From FDR No.6/66 dt.5.5.81 for Rs.25,000/- in the names of Balaji 14,929.50 Mahadevan with Central Bank of India, R.A.Puram, Coimbatore, preclosed on 9.8.86 for Rs.39,929.50.
29. From FDR No.716063 dt.26.5.76 for Rs.6,000/- of Indian Bank, 6,048.00 Esplanade in the name of Sh.G.Chandrasekar, matured on 26.5.83 for Rs.12,048/-
30. From FDR No.359613 dt.20.7.77 for Rs.4,500/- in the name of 4,536.00
(a) Sh.C.Mahadevan matured on 20.7.84 for Rs.9,036/ with Bank of Maharashtra, Coimbatore.
(b) Income of Rs.964/- by transfer from SB A/c No.1422 of 964.00 Shri.P.Mahadevan with Bank of Maharashtra for issue of FDR No.359587 dt.20.7.84 for Rs.10,000/- (Rs.4,500 + Rs.4,536 + Rs.964 =Rs.10000/-
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.9/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
Sl. Details Rupees
No.
31. From FDR No.85/80 dt.17.7.80 for Rs.20,000/- in the name of 13,733.92
Mrs.Krishna & G.Kannan with P.N.B., Teynampet, Madras. To be matured on 17.8.90, but closing balance as on 30.10.86 Rs.33,733.92.
32. From FDR No.87/80 dt.18.8.80 for Rs.20,000/- in the name of 15,645.22 C.Balaji and C.K.Veni with P.N.B. Teynampet, Madras to be matured on 18.8.90. Closing balance as on 30.10.86 is Rs.35,645.22.
33. From FDR No.227/82 dt.20.10.82 for Rs.25,000/- in the names of 8,625.00 C.K.Veni and Miss Shobana with P.N.B,Teynampet, Madras. Closed on 21.10.85 for Rs.33,525/- and re-issued as FDR No.257/85 dt.21.10.85
34. From FDR No.257/85 dt.21.10.85 for Rs.33,625/- in the names of 1,686.70 Mrs. C.K.Veni and Miss Shobana with P.N.B., Teynampet, Madras, for a period of 5 years, but pre-closed on 3.7.86 for Rs.35,311.70. Pay order issued. The Pay order stands encashed on 13.7.86.
35. From FDR No.135/83 dt.2.6.83 for Rs.25,000/- in the names of 7,907.45 Shri.G.Chandrasekar, Mrs.Krishnaveni for a period of 60 months. To
(a) be matured on 2.6.88. But pre-closed on 3.7.86 for Rs.32,907.45. Pay order is sued and encashed on 13.7.86
(b) By way of transfer of Rs.904.48 from the A/c of Shri P.Mahadevan on 904.48 2.6.83 for issue of FDR No.135/83 dt.2.6.83 for .25,000/-.
36. From S.B A/c No.4504 in the name of Miss.C.Shobana with 25.05 P.N.B.Teynampet, Madras.
37. From S.B A/c No.4505 in the name of Miss.C.Shobana with 359.95 P.N.B.Teynampet, Madras.
38. Interest earned by deposit of Rs.6000 on 22.05.1976 in the name of 6,047.52 Shri.G.Chandrasekar with SBI, Madras-1 matured on 22.5.83.
39. Interest earned by SB A/c No.4-170 with SBI, Madras-1 in the name 366.78 of Shri.G.Chandrasekar between 1.1.74 to 20.1.78 (date of closure)
40. Interest income earned by Mrs.Krishna Veni through her recurring 4,146.00 deposit A/c No.7 & 8/75 with IOB, Esplanade between 25.1.75 and 9.2.82
41. Interest income earned through S.B.A/c.No.2191 with PNB, 63.23 Teynampet in the name of Suba and Shoba.
42. Interest income earned through S.B.A/c.No.3182 with PNB, 4.95 Teynampet in the names of C.Shoba & Pappa, Madras-18 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.10/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Thus, the total income received by Shri.G.Chandrasekar (A1) and his family members during check period come to Rs.9,39,388.41. Expenditure:-
Sl. Details Rupees
No.
1. Building licence fees permit for construction of No.1,Karpagam 1,076.00
avenue, Madras-28
2. Amount paid in cash on 20.11.74 as improvement charges to the 6,930.00
Corporation of Madras, for the construction of No.1, Karpagam Avanue, Madras-28.
3. Amount spent towards repairs of the house at No.1, Karpagam 9,000.00 Avenue,Madras-28.
4. Expenditure towards payment of property tax paid to Corporation of Rs.13,504.55 Madras.
5. Expenditure on a/c of Water tax for house at No.1, Karpagam 4,343.00 Avenue, Madras-28.
6. Expenditure incurred towards maintenance of house during 75-76 15,814.00
7. Expenditure on A/c of electricity consumption for the occupation of 13,889.35 18, Karpagam Avenue during 80 to 86.
8. Expenditure on a/c of mortgage of premises No.1,Karpagam Avanue, 278.50 Madras-28 executed on 5.12.74 for H.B.A.
9. Re-conveyance fees paid for the cancellation of mortgage deed on 17 70.00 and 18.7.85.
10. Insurance fees paid to National Insurance of No.1,Karpagam Avenue, 81.00 Madras-28.
11. Expenditure on payment of legal fees to MPT towards scrutiny of 25.00 documents for HBA
12. Cash paid on 19.6.85 towards interest on HBA to MPT. 7,884.40
13. Repayment of loan to P.Mahadevan (AB) 16,100.00
14. Amount advanced to P.Mahadevan (A8) by Al for purchase of car 14,900.00
15. Payment of interest on loan raised from Bank of Maharashtra and re- 6,014.95 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.11/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Sl. Details Rupees No. payment of loan.
16. Repayment of loan along with its interest to Punjab National Bank, 4,381.10 Washermanpet, Madras.
17. Repayment of loan along with its interest by A2 to Andhra Bank, 6,754.75 Mylapore, Madras.
18. Interest on loan raised by Al with State Bank of Travancore, 988.70 Madras-2.
19. Repayment of loan along with interest to LIC 2,090.30
20. Loss on A/c of pre-closure of FDR with Vysya Bank, Mylapore, 1,113.94 Madras.
21. Loss on a/c of pre-closure of FDR with Vysya Bank, Mylapore, 988.24 Madras.
22. Interest paid on loan taken with Vysya Bank 487.00
23. Interest paid on loan taken by Al from Vysya Bank, Mylapore, 935.60 Madras.
24. O.D. interest paid to SBI,Madras by A1 to the current account 174.31
25. O.D. interest paid to current a/c No.20 with SBI, Madras-1 during 77- Rs. 191.69 78.
26. Rent paid to locker No.307 with IOB, Santhome, Madras. 1,039.00
27. Rent paid to locker Nos.21 & 86 during 84-85 by A1 with Andhra 710.00 Bank, Mylapore, Madras
28. Rent paid to locker No.129 during 86 with Canara Bank, Madras -4. 352.50
29. Rent paid to locker No.256, during 1986 with IOB, Meenambakkam, 77.50 Madras.
30. Rent paid to locker Nos.369 and 370 during 86 with Bank of Madura, 600.00 Besant Nagar, Madras.
31 Rent paid to locker No.363 with Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar, Rs.300.00 during 1986.
32. Security deposit paid to locker Nos.369 and 379 with Bank of 3,000.00 Madurai, Besant Nagar, Madras.
33. Rent paid to locker No.378 and 385 with Bank of Madura, Besant Rs.600.00 Nagar, Madras during 1986.
34. Security deposit paid to the above locker Rs. 2,000.00 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.12/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Sl. Details Rupees No.
35. Rent paid to locker No.224 with TNSC Bank, Nungambakkam, Rs.90.00 Madras-34.
36. Rent paid locker No.26 with TNSC Bank, Madras, during 1986 Rs. 180.00
37. Rent paid to locker Nos.112, 127, 138, 149 with Punjab National Rs. 2,210.00 Bank, Teynampet, Madras, during 1980 to 1986
38. Excess journey fare paid towards LTC availed in 84 to Gulmarg & 2,856.00 back
39. Loss on account of sale of Car No.3975 Rs. 9,378.50
40. Educational expenses for A4 Rs. 7,472.00
41. Educational expenses for A5 Rs. 8,979.00
42. Educational expenses for Miss C.Lavanya Rs.6,455.00 43 Expenditure on a/c purchase of books etc. for his children Rs. 6,455,00
44. Expenditure on a/c of foreign tour in 1986 Rs.1,40,985.00
45. Expenditure on payment of Customs Duty towards clearance of Rs.2.250.00 foreign goods.
46. Expenses incurred on Arangetram for Shobana & Lavanya Rs,1,650.00
47. Expenditure at Mylapore Club 1,311.15
48. Expenditure incurred on maintenance of conveyance 49,335.15
49. Expenditure towards payment of income tax during 1986 21,643.00
50. Expenditure towards payment of I.T and Wealth Tax in the name of 1,02,930.00 Chakravarthy
51. Household expenditure from 1974 to 1986 1,02,600.00 Total 6,15,829.18 Thus, the likely savings at the end of the check period comes to Rs.3,23,559.23 i.e., income Rs.9,39,388.41 (-) Expenditure Rs.6,15,829.18 as against that the assets acquired during the check period is found to be Rs.48,62,322.01.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.13/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 A. Immovable Assets:-
Sl. Details Rupees
No.
1. Plot at No.1, Karpagam Avenue, R.A,Puram, Madras-28.
a). Cost as per the register document Rs.20,902.00
b). Stamp duty Rs.2,122.00
c). Register Fees Rs.133.50
Total Rs.23,157.50
2. Cost of building constructed at No.1, Karpagam Avenue, Madras-28 23,157.50
at the above plots as valued and declared by Shri.G.Chandrasekar on Nov.1985.
3. House at 8 & 9 Sullivan St., Coimbatore in the name of Mrs.Krishna Rs.94,000.00 veni. Area 1843 sq.ft. construct6ed area 500 sq.ft. purchased on 07.05.80 Cost Rs.20,000.00 Stamp Charges Rs.2,600.00 Registration Fees Rs. 200.00 Rs.22,800.00 22,800.00 B. Movable Assets:-
1. Ambassador Car No.TMT 610 purchased in Jan.1978 standing in the 15,000.00 name of Sri G. Chandrasekar
2. Enfield Silver-plus Moped TMF 6053 6,900.00 C.Bank Assets (FDRs & BALANCES):-
1. Bank balance with IOB, Santhome Branch as on 5.9.86 in SB 8,237.81 A/c.No.7715.
2. Canara Bank, Abiramapuram, Madras SB A/c balance as on 5.9.86 55,047.35
3. Dena Bank,Alwarpet, Madras F.D. Deposit of Rs.50,000/- on 6.3.85 54,691.40 which was subsequently preclosed and converted into pay orders totalling to Rs.54691.40 as on 5.9.86.
4. Indian Bank, R.A,Puram, Madras FDR for s.50000/- on 6.3.85 which 54,985.00 was subsequently preclosed and converted into four FDs for Rs.13746.25 dt.5.7.86 each.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.14/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
5. Union Bank of India, Chamiers Road, Madras-FDR for Rs.25,000/- 41,805.00 made on 8.10.80 and the interest earned by the FDR
6. Bank of America, Mount Road, Madras-2 FDR for Rs.80,000 made 80000.00 on 6.8.86 in the name of S. Rajagopalan
7. Syndicate Bank,T.Nagar, Madras-17 pay order dt.17.7.86 by pre- 31,167.25 closing FDR of Rs.22000/- dt.20.10.82 in the name of Mrs. Krishnaveni and Mahadevan
8. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur Mylapore, Madras-4 pay order dt. 44,380.30 16.7.86 by pre-closing FDR for Rs.40,000/- dt.23.2.85 in the name of Mrs.Krishnaveni and C.Mahadevan
9. Bank of India, Mylapore, Madras-4 pay order dt.17.7.86 for 35406.30 35,406.30 by preclosing the renewed FDR for Rs.25000/- dt.21.10.85 in the name of Krishnasekar and Lavanya
10. Canara Bank, Mylapore, Madras – 4 Assets held in the form of pay 33,702.50 order dated 17.07.1986 for Rs.33,702.50/- by preclosing the FDR for Rs.2000/- dated 07.09.1980 in the names of Mrs.C.K.Veni and C.Mahadevan
11. Pay order dt.17.7.86 for Rs.44112.17 by preclosing the FDR for 44,112.17 Rs.40000/- dt.23.2.85 held in the names of Mrs.Krishnaveni and C.Mahadevan with Indian Bank, Alwarpet, Madras-18 12 Pay order dt.17.7.86 for Rs.44068.80 by preclosing FDR for 44,068.80 Rs.40000/- dt.25.2.85 in the names of Mrs. Krishnaveni and C.Mahadevan, with Indian Bank, East Abiramapuram, Madras-28. 13 Pay Order dt.16.7.86 for Rs.44091.90 by pre-closing FDR of 44,091.90 Rs.40000/- dt.23.2.85 in the names of Mrs.Krishnaveni and C.Mahadevan with Bank of Baroda, Mylapore.
14. FDR for Rs.20000/- dt.8.4.81 in the names of Mrs.Krishna and 20,000.00 C.Shobana with Bank of Baroda, Mylapore
15. Pay order for Rs.44,100.30 by pre-closing FDR for Rs.5.40,000/- 44,100.30 dt.23.2.85 in the names of Mrs.Krishnaveni and C,Mahadevan with Central Bank of India, Mylapore, Madras.
16. Bank balance of Rs.35,000/- with Bank of Baroda, R.K.Nagar, 35,000.00 Madras-28 in SB A/c No.5084 as on 5.9.86.
17. Pay order dt.19.7.86 for Bs.41825.65 by preclosing FDR dt.8.10.80 41,825.65 for s.25000/- held in the names of C.Lavanya and Mrs. Krishna with Bank of Baroda, R.K.Nagar, Madras-28.
18. Bank balance in CD A/c No.518 in the name of Shri.G.Chandrasekar 8,156.60 with Bank of Maharashtra, Madras-1 as on 5.9.86. _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.15/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
19. Cash certificate for Rs.22308/- dt.16.7.86 in the name of Mrs. 22,308.00 Krishnaveni and Kannan with Bank of Maharashtra, Ashoknagar, Madras
20. Deposit receipt No.16829 dt.16.7.86 for Rs.21700/- in the names of 21,700.00 Krishnamumari and Kannan with Bank of Maharashtra, Ashok Nagar, Madras.
21. FDR No.823050 dt.31.7.86 in the names of Mrs. Vasantha and Mrs. 25,000.00 Padma, 48, Thanikachalam St., Madras-17 with IOB,Meena tabakkam
22. Balance in SB a/c No.4769 in the names of Mr.R.G.Kannan & Mrs. 19.65 R.G.Kannan with Central Bank of India, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore, Balance as on 5.9.86
23. 23.Balance in SB A/c No.4771 in the name of Balaji Mahadevan with 10.00 Central Bank of India, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore, Balance as on 5.9.86
24. 24.Balance in SB A/c No.4584 in the name of Miss Parvathi, 48, 500.00 Thanikachalam St., Madras-17 with TNSC Bank, Nungambakkam.
25. FDR No.359587 dt.20.7.84 for Rs.10000/- in the name of Sri 10,000/- C.Mahadevan with Bank of Maharashtra, Coimbatore
26. FDR No.85/80 dt.17.8.80 for Rs.20000/- in the names of Mrs. 33,733.92 Krishna and Sri G.Kannan with PNB, Teynampet,Madras. Balance as on 30.10.86 is Rs.33733.92 (no interest was paid since its deposit on 17.8.80 till 5.9.86)
27. FDR No.87/80 dt.18.8.80 for Rs.20000/- in the name of Sri C. Balaji 35,645.22 and Mrs.C.K. Veni with PNB Teynampet,Madras. Closing balance as on 30.10.86 is Rs.35,645.22. No interest was paid since its deposit on 18.8.80 till 5.9.86
28. Cash deposit receipt No.182/84 dt.15.11.84 in the names of 29,000.00 Mrs.Krishnan and Miss Shobana with PNB,Teynampet,Madras. (FDR not traceable. Reported to have been destroyed. Duplicate FDR in different names issued which is also not traced. Interest neither paid to the accused nor added in the assets).
29. Cash deposit FDR No.183/84 dt. 15.11.84 for .30000/- in the names Rs.30,000.00 of Mrs.Krishna & Co. Mahadevan with P.N.B., Teynampet Madras. (FDR not traceable Reported to have been destroyed. Duplicate FDR in different names issued which is also not traced. Interest neither paid to the accused nor added in the assets) 30 FDR No.230/85 dt.29.9.85 for Rs.20000/- in the names of Rs.20,000.00 Mrs.Krishnaveni and Mrs.Lakshmi 1299 Thadagam Road, Coimbatore with P.N.B, Teynampet. To be matured on 29.9.88. (FDR not traceable. Reported to have been destroyed. Duplicate FDR in _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.16/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 different names issued which is also not traced. Interest neither paid to the accused, nor added to the assets)
31. FDR No.229/85 dt.29.9.85 for Rs.10000/- in the names of Mrs. 10,000.00 Subbulakshmi Mahadevan and Papa with P.N.B. Teynampet,Madras for a period of three years (Note: originally FDR No.90/82 for Rs.10000/- was taken on 1.9.8 in the names of Mrs. Subbulakshmi and Papa depositing cash. This was matured on 1.9.85. Re-issued as fresh FDR No.229/85 dt.29.9.85. (The interest accrued from 1.9.8 to 1.9.85 was periodically trans- ferred to SB A/c No.3029 in the name of Mrs.Subbulakshmi).
32. FDR No.627882 dt. 17.1.85 with IOB Esplanade, Madras. in the Rs.10,000.00 name of Miss C.Shobana
33. FDR No.340713 dt.10.8.83 with IOB, Esplanade in the names of Rs.28,000 Mrs.Subbulakshmi & Krishnaveni
34. Balance in SB a/c No.2191 in the name of Subha and Shobana with Rs.188.23 PNB, Teynampet, Madras-18
35. Balance in SB a/c No.3182 in the name of C.Shoba and Papa with 4.95 PNB, Teynampet,Madras-18.
D.Cash and Jewelleries Held in Bank's Lockers
1. 1. Cash in locker No.369 in the name of Mrs. Lakshmi Viswanathan 95,230.00 and Meenakshi with Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar,Madras, which was seized on 27.8.86.
2. (a). Cash in locker No.378 in the names of V.Meena and Jaiwant with Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar, Madras, seized on 5.9.86. 10,49,277,00
(b). Foreign currencies in the same locker No.378 seized on 5.9.86
(i). U.S. $ 3.053 x 12.35 37,704.55
(ii). Tachent Frac 200x1.60 320.00
(iii). D.M.160 x 5.45 872.00 38,896.55
3. 3. Cash and jewels in locker No.385 in the names of V.Meena and Jaiwant with Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar, Madras.
(i). Cash 11,56,964.00
(ii). Jewelleries Valued 8,90,062.10
4. Cash with TNSC Bank, Nungambakkam, Madras, seized on 23.9.86. Rs.60,000.00
(Locker was sealed on 30.8.86) from locker No.26 in the name of Padma and Miss Parvathy _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.17/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 E. L.I.C Policies
1. L.I.C Policy No.11055425held in the name of Sri G.Chandrasekar 4,834.96 Rs.2463.97 + 2370.99
2. LIC Policy No.43104531 held in the name of Sri G.Chandrasekar Rs. 25,734.60 11,437,60 + 14,297,00.
F. Household Articles at No.10, Spring Heaven Road, Madras as on 27.06.1986.
(i) Furniture Rs.6985.00
(ii). Electrical Gadgets Rs.1500.00
(iii). Clothings Rs.16200.00
(iv). Other Articles Rs.6085.00
(v). Jewelleries Rs.4800.00
(vi). Radio Casettes Rs.10925.00
Total 46,495.00
Cash of Rs.1787 not added as they are deemed to have been spent by 5.9.86.
Articles purchased in foreign currency while they were on tour abroad totalling to $ 1278 was not taken into a/c as they have deemed to have been purchased out of foreign exchange released by RBI/FTS. Household articles found at No.17, Karpagam Avenue, Madras-28 which are declared as possessed by Sri G. Chandrasekar and his family members.
(i).Articles such as sarees, clothings tape recorders etc. as per the 11,077.00 inventory.
(ii) Cash of Rs.10696/- found on 27.6.86 in the Almirah of Mrs.Krishnaveni was not taken into account as the check period was extended to 5.9.86.
(iii). Deposit with South Madras Gas Agency towards gas cylinder. 350.00 G. Others
1. T.Cs. is sued in the name of Mrs.Krishnaveni equivalent to U.S.£ 4,588.00 370 @ 12.40 as on 28.5.85
2. T.Cs. issued in the name of Sri G. Chandrasekar by Thomas Cook 1,240.00 equivalent to U.S.£ 100/- @ Rs.12.40 as on 28.5.85 (Above two items were seized on 27.6.86) _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.18/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Properties held in the benami names of his in-laws and through them.
(1) Plot at No.18, Karpagam Avenue, Madras-28 purchased on 36,000.00 15.9.78
(ii). House constructed (ground floor and first floor) during 1979-86 2,62,827.00
(iii). Deposit with Sakthi Finance Ltd., Coimbatore in the name of 20,000.00 Mrs. S. Avaiambal, W/o Sambamoorthy on 09.8.1986 Total 48,62,322.01 Thus, the total assets held by Shri.G.Chandrasekaran (A1) in his name of his family members and benami names as stated above comes to Rs.48,62,322.01.
The quantum of disproportionate assets held by the Shri.G.Chandrasekaran (A1) is as follows:-
1. Income received by G.Chandrasekar his wife and children during the 9,39,388.41 check period 1.1.74 to 5.9.86
2. Expenditure incurred by G. Chandrasekar and his wife and children 6,15,829.18 during the check period 1.1.74 to 5.9.86
3. Therefore likely savings during the check period (1-2) 3,23,559.23
4. Add the value of assets held by G.Chandrasekar, his wife and 76,211.34 children as on 1.1.74 (at the beginning of the check period)
5. Hence likely legitimate assets which could be held by 3,99,770.57 G.Chandrasekar, his wife and children as on 5.9.86 (3+4)
6. Assets held by G. Chandrasekar, his wife and children as on 5.9.86. 48,62,322.01
7. Therefore assets possessed by G.Chandrasekar and his family Rs.44,62,551.44 members which could not be satisfactorily explained (6-5) _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.19/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
7. A1 & A3 both being public servant, sanction to prosecute was obtained and then final report was filed. Before framing charges, P.Mahadevan (A-8) the father-in-law of A1 died. After rearranging the rank, against the remaining eight accused, charges were framed and they were tried.
8. Pending appeal, the Learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent produced death certificates of A1 (G.Chandrasekar) & A8 (Subbulakshmi). In view of their demise, the Criminal Appeal against them is dismissed as abated.
9. The prosecution, to prove the charges examined 120 witnesses (P.W.1 to P.W.120), marked 1429 documents (Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.1429) and 69 material objects (M.O.1 to M.O.69) On the side of the defence, A-6 K.Chakravarthy graced the witness box, examined as D.W.1, 30 documents (Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.30) were marked.
10. The trial Court, after a detailed scrutiny of evidence concluded that, prosecution has failed to prove the charges. The Learned trial Judge has observed that, “the prosecution case, encircled on all sides with serious doubts, suspicions, defects, lacunae, loopholes and deficiencies with reference to which _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.20/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 no acceptable and plausible explanation is forthcoming on the side of the prosecution. In such circumstances, as rightly argued, the benefit of doubt emanating from the same should be extended in favour of the accused persons.
I, therefore hold that, the prosecution has miserably failed to establish all the charges levelled against the accused persons A1 to A8 beyond reasonable doubts and accordingly, acquitted A1 to A8 of all the charges framed against them.”
11. Regarding the assets of cash and jewelleries recovered from the locker Nos.378 and 385 of Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar, though A-6 (K.Chakravarthy) claimed ownership and sought for return of the property, the trial Court held that, the prosecution has not established that the assets of cash and jewelleries recovered from the locker Nos.378 and 385 of Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar belongs to the 1st accused (Chandrasekar) or his family members. A-6 (K.Chakravarthy) has also failed to prove that the cash and jewelleries recovered from the above said two lockers belongs to him. The cash of Rs.60,000/- seized from the locker No.26 of TNSC Bank, Nungambakkam was also not proved to be that of 1st accused or his family members. The cash and jewelleries recovered from the lockers Nos.378 and 385 of Bank of Madura, _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.21/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Besant Nagar and the cash of Rs.60,000/- seized from locker No.26 of TNSC Bank, Nungambakkam are marked case materials and material objects.
12. In the event of any claim of ownership of the same by a 3rd party, after giving notice to the C.B.I, ordered to be returned to the person to whom they are really entitled to, after establishment of his ownership in the Court, after the expiration of the appeal or if any appeal is preferred after the disposal, as per the directions of the Appellate Court. In case, no one put forth any claim of ownership to the above said cash and jewels after the expiration of the appeal or after such time as the Court deems fit and necessary to wait in the circumstances of the case, after notice to the CBI, the value of the above cash and jewelleries as its stands at that point of time are ordered to be confiscated to the State after getting due orders from the Court in accordance with the rules.
13. According to the prosecution at the beginning of the check period i.e., 01.01.1974, A1 had property worth Rs.76.211.34, his income during the check period quantified at Rs.9,39,388.41. During the check period the estimated expenditure arrived at Rs.6,15,829.18; The resultant savings at the end of the check period been worth at Rs.3,23,559.23. At the end of the check _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.22/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 period, the legitimate assets which could have been held by A1 and his family be only Rs.3,99,770.57. Whereas, the property held by A1 and his family worth Rs.48,62,322.01. For extent of Rs.44,62,551.44, accused was unable to satisfactorily explain the source for possession by him and his family members.
14. In the final report, it has been alleged that, the properties which stood in the name of A2, A4, A5, A7, A8 (deceased) and his wife (A-9) were the ill-gotten money of A1 which has been deposited either in their names or in the fictitious or assumed names in various banks or converted as valuables such as jewelleries. To screen the offender, A3 and A6 indulged in forgery of documents, used forged documents as genuine and manipulated documents and accounts. A1 in connivance with A-2, his wife, opened several accounts in different banks and operated lockers to conceal the ill-gotten wealth. Sensing the Law Enforcing Agency was after them, A2 in connivance with A-7 (Meena Vaikunth) transferred the contents of valuables in A-2 locker to the locker of A- 7 and that was seized by the C.B.I, during the search operation. Knowing the seizure, they set up A-6 (K.Chakravarthy) who came forward to claim the materials found in locker Nos.378 and 385 at Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar, as if it belongs to him which he entrusted to A-7 for keeping the same in safe _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.23/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 custody, fearing action by Income Tax Department and Enforcement Authorities. The Income Tax returns filed subsequently under Voluntarily Disclosure Scheme heavily relied by A-6 (K.Chakravarthy), for claiming ownership of the contents of these two lockers. The prosecution has substantially relied upon the evidence of S.Rajagopalan, Approver who was examined as P.W.97 to disprove the claim of A-6 and had highlighted the improbabilities in the theory put forth by A-6. The trial Court accepted the prosecution to the extend that the claim of A-6 is not genuine. The documents and evidence to establish ownership over the content of locker in the name of A-7 are all after the seizure and not reliable.
15. The trial Court, after going through the evidence on item wise in Annexures A to F, had found several infirmities in the case of the prosecution. Particularly, the cash and jewelleries to an extent of Rs.31,55,199.65 seized from the lockers bearing Nos.378 and 385 at Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar Branch, as per record the lockers stands in the name of A7 (Meena Vaikunth) and her son Jaivanth. According to the prosecution, the property belongs to A1 and added those properties to the assets of A-1 held at the end of the check period to show the disproportionality. While A1 and A2 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.24/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 had disowned them and said they are not the owners of the property, the property found in the locker which is in the name of A7 cannot be added to the assets of A1. A-7 (Meena Vaikunth) has independent family and source of income for herself and living separately elsewhere. She has claimed that those properties were given to her by A-6.
16. The prosecution has not proved that, A-7 form part of the A-1's family or the property found in the lockers of A-7 belongs to A-1. However, they have came out with the version that, sensing C.B.I is after A-1, the accused availed locker facility at Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar Branch, on 05.08.1986 in the name of A-7 and made use of those lockers to conceal his property.
17. P.W.76 P.L.Sundaresan, Clerk of Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar Branch, has testified before the Court that, locker Nos.378 & 385 was allotted to Meena Vaikunth (A-7) on 05.08.1986. The application forms Ex.P.646 & Ex.P.644 reveals that, A-7 Meena Vaikunth and her son Jaivanth had made their application for allotting locker and same has been considered by the Bank Authorities and two lockers were allotted to them, after receiving necessary security deposit. There is no indication from the prosecution _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.25/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 evidence that, these two lockers were availed at the instance of A1 in the name of A-7 and his son. That apart, the prosecution has also come out with the story that, the jewels and currency in the locker of A-2 (C.Krishnaveni) was shifted to the locker of A-7 (Meena Vaikunth) and the Bank Officials saw the transferring from outside the locker room. It has been established in the cross examination and through document by the defence that, no two customers can be in the locker room at the same time and the transaction inside the locker room cannot be seen by anybody else from outside. The entires made in the locker document marked as Ex.P.640, Ex.P.641 and Ex.P.643, the initials in the respective entires were not tested with the expert opinion, to substantiate the case of the prosecution that, A2 in connivance of A-7, shifted the material from one locker to another locker on 05.08.1986.
18. The trial Court has also found that, though the prosecution stated that, the finger prints in the lockers were lifted and sent for comparison by Finger Print Experts and got their opinion, the finger print experts opinion not placed before the Court. The reason for not producing the report also not been spoken by Investigating Officer. One of the Bank staff had spoken that, he saw a tall fair lady operating the locker on the relevant day but that witness _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.26/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 did not identified any of the accused at the time of giving his evidence. The signature found in the locker operation book on 05.08.1986, sent for comparison with A2's signature however the report says the result is inconclusive. Thus, the case of the prosecution regarding the alleged transfer or shifting the properties by A-2 to the locker of A-7 not established.
19. To add, a sum of Rs.55,047.35 in Canara Bank, Abiramipuram, which alleged to be the money in the account opened by A1 in the name of the Approver P.W.97 is shown as assets of the accused under the caption “Bank assets”. No account number mentioned. The statement of account (Ex.P.601) goes to show that, between 14.08.1986 to 05.09.1986, money found in the account been withdrawn. It is alleged by the accused that this money was allowed to be withdrawn by the approver Rajagopalan by the Investigating Agency as quid pro quo for him to turn as approver and give statement of confession in favour of the prosecution. This allegation has gained credibility, when P.W.97 the Approver Rajagopalan, in the witness box admitted that, he was taken to the Canara Bank, Abiramipuram by D.S.P Thagarajan P.W.118 and asked to close the Account. If the account was closed by P.W.97, naturally the balance left in the account should have been taken by him and not A-1. _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.27/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 Without even mentioning the account number of account holder, the prosecution has added a sum of Rs.55,047.35 as assets of A1. Whereas, the prosecution own witness admits that, the account was closed by him (Meaning:-
he is the account holder and he has withdrawn the money.) Therefore, the trial Court has rightly held that, on account of complete absence of material to sustain the case of the prosecution that the money laying in the Canara Bank, Abiramipuram, belongs to A-1. The said amount cannot be taken as the assets of A-1. Similarly, F.D.R for Rs.80,000/- in the name of P.W.97, S.Rajagopalan, Approver, is claimed to be the money of A1 by the prosecution and if so, the prosecution has no answer why that money was allowed to be withdrawn by Rajagopalan instead of seizing the money.
20. P.W.116, in the cross examination admits that, he has not made any investigation regarding Rs.80,000/- invested in the name of S.Rajagoplan Approver, at Bank of America and this deposit was made on the request of S.Rajagopalan, as per the form relied by the prosecution and apparently the money has been withdrawn by P.W.97.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.28/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
21. To prove that, the jewels found in the Locker Nos.378 and 385 belongs to A1 and it was purchased from Kirtilal Kalidas Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore, several years ago. The prosecution has examined P.W.92, he has identified the jewels M.O.1, M.O.2 and M.O.9 as jewels sold by them from their show room. P.W.120, Managing Director of Kirtilal Kalidas Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore, had identified Ex.P.752 to Ex.P.761, which are invoices and vouchers issued by them. He could re-collect saying that, the order placed by P.Mahadevan A8 (deceased), for two items of jewels Attigai and Padhakkam and he sold it to A-8. The order placed by Subbulakshmi (A-9), for two Bangles and necklace under Ex.P.749 and he sold it to A-9. Another necklace was purchased by A-9 in the name of Prasath under invoice Ex.P.775. He could also recollect that, A-8 accompanied his wife A-9 and daughter A-2. To link A-1 and his family to the jewels found in the Locker Nos.378 and 385 these witnesses and exhibits relied. However, the trial Court has rightly rejected the said plea since the bills and invoices referred by P.W.120 is not Authored by him. The description of the jewels in the bills and vouchers did not tally with M.O.1, M.O.2 and M.O.9. Identifying the customers after 30 years and that too not during the investigation but in the Court are reasons assigned to reject it as doubtful evidence.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.29/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
22. Yet another glaring defect in the prosecution case is the inclusion of the properties of in-laws as properties of A-1, the Public Servant. The land and building stood in the name of in-laws been shown as asset of A-1, ignoring the fact that, A-8 Mahadevan, who is the father-in-law of A-1 is an Income Tax assessee carrying on business in Yarn dyeing and A-2 is his only child. A-7 Meena wife of Vaikunth, Lieutenant Colonel been married long back and living separately with her family and her son Jaivanth who was pursuing M.B.B.S course at relevant point of time. However, the assets of Meena A-7 also been included in the assets of A-1 inspite of the fact that, she does not form part of A-1's family and not living with A1.
23. The Appeal by the State alleging that, the trial Court has erroneously deleted 14 items of assets in the statement-B for total value of Rs.44,01,369.54 based on the income tax returns filed subsequent to the search and seizure is incorrect. The said exclusion is not only based on the returns filed under the VDS scheme alone. The defence was able to prove that those properties does not belong to A-1 or his family members but it belongs to persons who had their own source of income.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.30/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
24. Just by adding those properties, as accused, the prosecution has got exposed itself the perfunctory investigation done by them. Yet another reason which, this Court finds to conclude the order of the trial Court should be confirmed is that, A-3 the Bank Manager of Punjab National Bank is arrayed as accused just because, A1 and his family members had account in the Branch were she was serving and made deposits. Collecting deposit is one of the responsibility of a banker and it relates to their performance. The Branch Manager need not check the source when a depositor come forward to invest the money.
25. It is contended that, A3 knowingly permitted the family members to make deposit in the fictitious name. Even assuming that some deposits in the fictitious name were made in their branch, the fact A3 had any dishonest intention in accepting the deposit is not been proved by the prosecution. It is pathetic to note that, in spite of marshalling more than 100 witnesses and marking 1429 exhibits with 69 material objects, the prosecution had failed to prove that, A1 through ill-gotten money had invested in his name and in the name of his family members, who was arrayed as accused. The prosecution has prosecuted in-laws of A1 , sister of A-1 and Manager of Punjab _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.31/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 National Bank, on suspicions substantial material evidence. While arraying the earning members of the family, in case of disproportionate assets, in all fairness their income should also been taken note. In this case, the prosecution has conspicuously omitted to consider the income of A-8 Mahadevan, a business man and Income Tax assessee and the income of A-7 the sister of A-1, who is married to a Lieutenant Colonel and living separately with her family. Likewise, the son and daughter of A-1 also been arrayed as accused for the reason that, A1 has deposited money in their name. It is nothing but improper prosecution taking 12 years as check period, omitting to include the income of the family members, however including the wife who had been employed as designer in the CO-OPTEX, the father-in-law a business man, the sister, who is wife of Lieutenant Colonel married long back and living with her husband with independent source of income. Relying upon the evidence of P.W.97 Rajagopalan, who turned to be an approver alleged that the money of A1 was invested in the name of Rajagoplan. The I.O has allowed Rajagopalan to withdraw the money instead of seizing it. This would prove that, the money does not belongs to A1 but Rajagoplan. The Investigating Officer himself not clear about his case. The evidence of P.W.97 Rajagopalan is inherently impossible and therefore, without corroboration his evidence of approver _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.32/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 cannot be relied upon.
26. The evidence of P.W.76 and P.W.100 to prove that, A2 operated the locker Nos.369, 370 in the name of Lakshmi and on 05.08.1986, the said Lakshmi came with another lady aged about 45 to 50 years old and introduced her for availing locker facility found to be false and that locker was opened in the name of Jaivanth allotting locker Nos.378 and 385 had been proved to be false since the account opening form does not even contain the introducer name. 45 to 50 years old lady whom the witness claims that, he saw when she came for opening the locker also not identified by this witness. Above all the locker register does not indicate that on 05.08.1986, those two lockers was operated. However, contrary to the Banking Rules which mandates maintenance of secrecy of customers, the prosecution has made these witnesses to say that, they allowed two customers in the locker room at the same time and they were witnessing the customers shifting the material from one locker to another.
27. The prosecution had heavily relied on the evidence of Approver but his evidence is not only unreliable but lacks corroboration _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.33/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 particularly, when he claims that, the money deposited in his name are the money of A-1 but he was allowed to withdraw the money and enjoy the same by the Investigating Officer.
28. In Mrinal Das and others -vs- The State of Tirpura reported AIR 2011 SC 3753, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stated that:-
26. In Sheshanna Bhumanna Yadav v. State of Maharashtra [(1970) 2 SCC 122 : 1970 SCC (Cri) 337] the test of reliability of the approver's evidence and rule as to corroboration was discussed. The following discussion and conclusion are relevant which read as under:-
“12. The law with regard to appreciation of approver's evidence is based on the effect of Sections 133 and 114, Illustration (b) of the Evidence Act, namely, that an accomplice is competent to depose but as a rule of caution it will be unsafe to convict upon his testimony alone. The warning of the danger of convicting on uncorroborated evidence is therefore given when the evidence is that of an accomplice. The primary meaning of accomplice is any party to the crime charged and someone who aids and abets the commission of crime. The nature of corroboration is that it is confirmatory evidence and it may consist of the evidence of second witness or of _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.34/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 circumstances like the conduct of the person against whom it is required. Corroboration must connect or tend to connect the accused with the crime. When it is said that the corroborative evidence must implicate the accused in material particulars it means that it is not enough that a piece of evidence tends to confirm the truth of a part of the testimony to be corroborated. That evidence must confirm that part of the testimony which suggests that the crime was committed by the accused. If a witness says that the accused and he stole the sheep and he put the skins in a certain place, the discovery of the skins in that place would not corroborate the evidence of the witness as against the accused. But if the skins were found in the accused's house, this would corroborate because it would tend to confirm the statement that the accused had some hand in the theft.
13. This Court stated the law of corroboration of accomplice evidence in several decisions. One of the earlier decision is Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1957 SC 637 : 1957 Cri LJ 1014 : 1957 SCR 953] and the recent decision is Lachhi Ram v. State of Punjab [AIR 1967 SC 792 : 1967 Cri LJ 671 : (1967) 1 SCR 243] . In Sarwan Singh case [AIR 1957 SC 637 : 1957 Cri LJ 1014 : 1957 SCR 953] this Court laid down that before the court would look into the corroborative evidence it was necessary to find out whether the approver or accomplice was a reliable witness. This Court in Lachhi Ram case _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.35/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 [AIR 1967 SC 792 : 1967 Cri LJ 671 : (1967) 1 SCR 243] said that the first test of reliability of approver and accomplice evidence was for the court to be satisfied that there was nothing inherently impossible in evidence. After that conclusion is reached as to reliability, corroboration is required. The rule as to corroboration is based on the reasoning that there must be sufficient corroborative evidence in material particulars to connect the accused with the crime.”
29. The Learned Counsels for the respondents made a submission that the Public Servant A-1 died on 11.04.2019. Pending appeal, so the appeal against acquittal in respect of non-public servant has to be dismissed. The said proposition canvassed is no more res integra in view of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Selvi J. Jayalalitha and Others reported in MANU/SC/0157/2017, the relevant portion of this judgment is extracted below:-
541. We have noticed that:
In State Through Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi v. Jitender Kumar Singh, reported in : (2014) 11 SCC 724, this Court held that once the power has been exercised by the Special Judge under Sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the P.C. Act to proceed against non-PC offences along with PC offences, the mere fact that the _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.36/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 sole public servant dies after the exercise of powers under Sub-section (3) of Section 4, will not divest the jurisdiction of the Special Judge or vitiate the proceedings pending before him. Therefore, we hold that as the sole public servant has died being A1 in this matter, in our opinion, though the appeals against her have abated, even then A2 to A4 are liable to be convicted and sentenced in the manner as has been held by the Trial Judge.
30. However, in case of acquittal by the trial Court, the view of the trial Court is possible even if there is any alternate possible view, the benefit of acquittal need not be reversed unless the order is perverse. In this case, after going through the judgment of the trial Court, this Court finds that, there cannot be any other alternate view other than the view taken by the trial Court. The reasoning given by the trial Court for acquittal is sustainable. Therefore, for that reason, the appeal preferred by the State has to be dismissed.
31. The case of prosecution been discussed threadbare by the trial Court and had acquitted the accused for want of proof. The appeal ground does not carry any merit for reversing the finding. Hence, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.37/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 32. Crl.A.No.468 of 2013 Insofar the Criminal Appeal filed by A-6 who seek return of the material objects recovered from the Locker Nos.378 and 385 which enumerated in the search list Ex.P.1263, which is the subject matter of Criminal Appeal No.468 of 2013, this Court finds that, the appellant had mounted the witness box and got examined as D.W.1. 30 Exhibits marked on his behalf. While prosecution has alleged that, this appellant to save A-1 and his family members from the disproportionate asset case has created false evidence had come forward to claim ownership of this property disclosing those assets in the VDS scheme subsequent to the seizure. It is the case of this appellant that, the material found in the lockers of A-7 are his property and he gave the property for safe custody fearing income tax raid. This version of defence has been rightly disbelieved by the trial Court.
33. As far as the property found in the locker Nos.378 and 385 in Bank of Madura, Besant Nagar Branch, which stood in the name of A-7, the case of the prosecution is that, A1 the public servant and A2 wife of the public servant and his son and daughter had lockers Nos.369, 379 and 363 in the said bank and to secret away the ill-gotten assets of A1, in the course of _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.38/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 investigation they transferred the content from their locker to the locker of A-7 which was opened on 05.08.1986. Further, the case of the prosecution is that, A-6 to aid A1 and his family who had secret away the assets, had come forward to support the explanation of A-1 had made a claim that the property found in the locker Nos.378 and 385 as if it belongs to him and he entrusted the same to A-7. However, the defence as spoken by A6 that, to keep his property, he introduced A-7 to the Bank Manager and availed two lockers is not supported by any other evidence, either ocular or documentary. The form for availing locker does not contain any introducer's name. If the case of the defence that A6 recommended for opening these two lockers in the name of A7, there should have been some reference in the locker opening application form or atleast some eye witness to that effect. Except the self serving statement of A-6 who has been examined as D.W.1, there is no material to show that, he assisted A7 to open the locker and his property was kept in that locker.
34. Section 452 of Cr.P.C., deals with procedure for disposal of property at the conclusion of trial. In this case, the prosecution has failed to prove that the property found in the locker belongs to A1 as alleged in their final report. At the same time, A7 in whose name the locker stands has _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.39/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 disowned the property and had stated that the property belongs to A6. A6 who claims the ownership of the property had not produced any document to prove that the properties found in the lockers belongs to him. The person who claims the property seized during the trial is entitled to claim the same after conclusion of trial provided, he produced document to prove the ownership, as mandated in Section 452 of Cr.P.C. If there is no claimant or any person who claims the property fails to show that, it was legally acquired by him, then the Magistrate may order to give the property at the disposal of the Government as mandated under Section 458 of Cr.P.C., which reads as below:-
Section 458. Procedure where no claimant appears within six months.
(1). If no person within such period establishes his claim to such property, and if the person in whose possession such property was found is unable to show that it was legally acquired by him, the Magistrate may by order direct that such property shall be at the disposal of the State Government and may be sold by that Government and the proceeds of such sale shall be dealt with in such manner as may be prescribed.
(2). An appeal shall lie against any such order to the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from convictions by the Magistrate.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.40/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
35. In this case, though the appellant A-6 had made an attempt to claim the right over the property, his evidence and documents does not prove that, he is the owner of the property or acquired by him legally. A question may arise who the owner of the property, if it is property of A1 then, it should have been added to the assets of A1 as claimed by the prosecution but the trial Court has declined to do so since there is no proof and admittedly, the property was found in the locker of A-7 and A-7 also had disowned the property for the reason best known and she says that the property was given to her by A-6. A-6 who claims the ownership of the property had failed to establish that, it is his property which he legally acquired to satisfy the mandate prescribed under Section 458 of Cr.P.C.
36. In the case of disproportionate assets due to various reasons, the prosecution may fail to prove the guilt of public servant. It may end in acquittal for want of proof beyond doubt, but the suspected wealth seized cannot be returned back to the accused unless he proves it was legally acquired. Proof of ownership is different from proof of accusation through legal means. In this case, though prosecution had made out a prima facie case that, after the investigation commenced A-7 who is the sister of A-1 had opened two lockers _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.41/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 in the same bank were A-2 had locker facility. During the search, in the locker of A-7 certain property found but A-7 does not claim ownership. Though the prosecution claims that, the property belongs to A-2, A-2 has also disowned right over the property.
37. In such circumstances, A-6 is the third party, who had come forward to claim his right in order to screen the crime cannot become beneficiary of his crime. Unless and until, he could establish that, the property found in the locker is legally acquired by him, he cannot have any right over it. The unclaimed property has to go to the Government as per Section 458 of Cr.P.C. For the said reason, this Criminal Appeal No.468 of 2013 is also dismissed.
38. In the result, the judgment of the trial Court in C.C.No.23 of 1997 passed by the IX Additional Special Judge for CBI cases is confirmed. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 are dismissed.
09.08.2023
Index :Yes.
Speaking order/non speaking order
bsm
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.42/44
Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013
Copy to:-
1. The IX Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, IX Additional City Civil Court, Chennai – 600 104.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, SPE, CBI, ACB, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.43/44 Crl.A.Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
bsm Delivery common judgment made in Criminal Appeal Nos.434 & 468 of 2013 09.08.2023 _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.44/44