Delhi District Court
Cbi vs . Chander Prakash on 11 September, 2014
RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 IN THE COURT OF Sh. POORAN CHAND: CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: CENTRAL DISTRICT: TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI RC No.: 14 (S)/90 PS: CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC CBI Vs. Chander Prakash Unique ID No.: 02401R0004141992 J U D G M E N T:
______________________________________________________________
(a) S.No. of the case : 44/2
(b) Name of complainant : S.G.S. Raju, Asst. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, ZO Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi.
(c) Date of commission of offence: On or before 29.11.1990.
(d) Name of the accused : (1) Chander Prakash Srivastava
S/o Sh. S.P. Srivastava
R/o C-233, Shastri Nagar,
Ghaziabad, UP
: (2) Arvind Kumar Srivastava
s/o Sh. Shyam Narain
Srivastava, r/o
11/69,Gwaltole, Kanpur, UP.
(proceedings against him
stood abated vide order
dated 03.03.2010)
(e) Offence complained of : 420/467/468/471/120B IPC
(f) Offence Charge : u/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/
471 IPC
(g) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(h) Final arguments heard on : 11.08.2014
(i) Final Order : Convicted
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 1 of 39
RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014
(j) Date of such order : 11.09.2014.
BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
The present RC was registered by CBI on 29.11.1990 against three accused persons i.e. Chander Prakash Srivastava (hereinafter referred as A1), Arvind Kumar Srivastava (A-2) and Chander Kumar (A-3) u/s 120B R/w section 420/467/468/471 IPC and substantiate offence thereof on the complaint of Assistant General Manager of Syndicate Bank, Zonal office Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi.
2 As per prosecution case the facts of this case are that Chander Prakash Srivastava (A-1) and Chander Kumar, Clerk (A-3) were posted at Hapur Branch of Syndicate Bank and they were having custody of demand draft pads at SSV College Extension Counter and Base branch Hapur, UP and a number of demand draft were stolen from the base Branch and SSV College Extension Counter, 13 forged demand draft were credited to the account of Rama Kant Tiwari and Sh. Yogender Kumar, (both fictitious name) and encashed. Both the accounts were introduced by A-2 and it was also found that the addressee given in the account opening forms were non-existence. One of the 13 DDs, encashed was found to be of Patiala Branch where A-1 had earlier worked and the same were encashed purported to have been issued by Hapur Branch of the Bank.
3 As per the case of the prosecution A-1 entered into a conspiracy with A2 and some other persons and in furtherance of the same opened saving bank A/c no. 26543 in Canara Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi on 02.09.1988 in the name of Rama Kant Tiwari a fictitious person. The account was introduced by A-2 who also filled in the body of account opening form, specimen signatures card and pay in slip for initial deposit and the A/c opening form and specimen card was signed by A-1 as Rama Kant Tiwari. In the account so opened, two forged demand drafts were credited and encashed to the tune of Rs. 1,29,780/- by A1. Again on 21.09.89 another saving bank account no. 28458 was opened in Canara Bank, CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 2 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Nehru Place, New Delhi in the name of Sh. Yogendra Kumar, again a fictitious person by A-1 and this time he forged the signatures of Arvind Kumar Srivastava as introducer and credited 11 forged demand draft to the tune of Rs. 14,67,947/- and encashed them. Out of 11 forged demand draft which were encashed in the name of Syndicate Bank Hapur and its extension counter at SSV College, one demand draft no. 156954 for Rs. 1,89, 785/- was found to be of Patiala Branch, Syndicate Bank where A1 was earlier posted as Assistant Manager and had received the questioned demand draft pad from HO Manipal. It is also the case of the prosecution that when the above accounts were opened by A-1, either he was on leave or it was a holiday in his bank. Further on most of the dates when DD credited into fictitious account and withdrawals made he was on leave. It is also case of the prosecution that A-1 had purchased UTI certificates in the name of his children by issuing cheque no. 650044 for Rs. 50,000/-, favouring UTI from the said account no. 28458 of Yogendra Kumar at Canara Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi. It is also the case of the prosecution that A1 made heavy investment in the movable and immovable properties after the commencement of fraud, out of the defrauded money. Further it is also case of the prosecution that on various occasion Sh. Rajiv Srivastava, brother in law of A-1 and Smt. Savita Srivastava wife of A1 also collected the payment of cheques from fictitious accounts.
4 After registration of the FIR, investigation was conducted in detailed and GEQD (Government Examiner of Questioned documents) were obtained and after completion of the investigation charge sheet u/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed against accused Chander Kumar Srivastava (A1), Arvind Kumar Srivastava (A2) and as no evidence was found against accused Chander Kumar, Clerk of Syndicate Bank he was put in Column no. 2 of the charge sheet. The charge sheet was filed against A-1 and A2 for cheating the Syndicate Bank by removing the demand draft leafs, forging them and encashing them fraudulently and dishonestly to the tune of Rs. 15,97,727/-.
5 Cognizance for offence u/s 120B/419/420/467/468/471/409 IPC was taken by the predecessor of this court against accused no. 1 and 2 and compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. was made. As evidence were deficient against accused CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 3 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Chander Kumar, he was not summoned.
6 Vide order dated 22.01.1996 arguments on charge were heard and u/s 120B R/w section 420/419/409/411/467/468/471 IPC charge were framed against accused persons. It is pertinent to mention that during pendency of the trial, accused Arvind Kumar Srivastava was expired and proceedings against accused Arvind Kumar Srivastava were abated by the predecessor of this court on 03.03.2010. In order to prove the guilt of accused persons, prosecution examined in as much as 39 witnesses. Thereafter, PE was closed. Statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded.
7 I have heard arguments advanced at Bar by the Ld. APP for the CBI, counsels for accused and perused the entire material on record. Accused has also filed written arguments in support of his defence.
8 Before adverting to adjudication upon the arguments advanced at Bar, it would be appropriate to have a brief scrutiny of the evidence recorded in the matter, which is as under.
9 PW1 S.B. Singh deposed that he was posted as Junior Engineer in Sector III, R.K. Puram since September 1990 and his nature of job was the maintenance of quarters in Sector III, R.K. Puram. During the year 1988 to 1991 there was no premises no. 10-C and 12-C in sector III, R.K. Puram.
10 PW2 Rajinder Kumar Sharma deposed that in the year 1987 he was working as Store Officer in Exportos India and Indexpo International P. Ltd was the sister concern of Exportos India and Arvind Kumar Srivasatava was working in the Indexpo International P Ltd and he introduced the account of Arvind Kumar Srivastava in Canara Bank of Nehru Place Branch and his signatures is at point A on Ex. PW2/A. He deposed that accused Arvind Kumar signed this account opening form at point B in his presence and endorsement at point C on Ex. PW2/A which is in his hand. He was maintaining an account in the same branch.
PW3 Ms. E.J. Ekka deposed that he was posted as an officer in CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 4 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Canara Bank of Nehru Place Branch in 1988 and he had verified the signatures of Arvind Introducer of the account which are at Q-28A and her signatures is at point A on Ex. PW3/A. She deposed that she had verified the signatures in the account opening form in the other account viz account no. 54106 bearing specimen card Ex. PW3/B. 11 PW4 V.K. Palekar deposed that in the year 1988-89 he was working as Officer in Canara Bank, Branch Nehru Place. Vide Ex. PW4/A he handed over certain documents to the IO and the said memo was signed by him at point A. He deposed that Ex. PW4/B is the specimen signatures card pertaining to account no. 28458 of Ex. PW4/B pertains to Ex. PW4/C account opening form. He deposed that account was allowed to be opened by Bishamber Dayal Supervisor and his signatures is at point A. Sh. S.R. Shenoy was the branch Mananger who allowed to open the account and his signatures are at point B. He deposed that he can identify the signatures of Bishamber Dayal and S.R. Shenoy as he worked under them and Ex. PW4/D was the original ledger sheet pertaining to account of Yogender Kumar. He deposed that it is maintained in the normal official course of banking business and the entry at point A in this ledger sheet is initialed by him vide which an amount of Rs. 98080/- was credited to the account of Yogender Kumar on 12.10.89 by clearing Ex. PW4/E is the clearing credit voucher pertaining to Ex. PW4/D at point A. He deposed that this credit voucher was initialed by him at point A and Ex. PW4/F is the corresponding demand draft pertaining to Ex. PW4/E and it was received in the normal official course of banking business in the Nehru Place Branch of Canara Bank along with pay in slip/credit voucher Ex. PW4/E. The body of the specimen signatures card Ex. PW4/B was signed in his presence and Yogender Kumar was alone at the time of opening of the account and signing of the specimen on signatures.
12 PW5 G. Kamlakannan deposed that he was posted as officer in Canara Bank Nehru Place Branch from 1991 to 1992, he signed as a witness on the specimen writing/signatures Ex. PW5/1 to 10 on the cheques and he was not able to recollect why he signed as a witness. He deposed that accused Chander Prakash whom he knew as Yoginder Kumar at that time had given the specimen CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 5 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 writing before CBI and in his presence on Ex PW5/1 to 10. He deposed that at that time Sh. Venogopal was also present and who also signed as a witness. Ex. PW5/11 to 18 are also the specimen signatures/hand writing of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava which were given by him in his presence and in the presence of Venogopal. He deposed that he and Venogpal witnesses these specimen writings and these specimen are on pay in slip. He deposed that Ex. PW5/1 to Ex. PW5/24 are also specimen signatures and hand writing of Yogender another set of pay in slips. He deposed that he witnessed on these specimen sheets and these were also given in his presence by Chander Prakash Srivastava. He deposed that Ex. PW5/25 to Ex. PW5/54 are also specimen signatures/handwriting of accused Chander Prakash on the cheque which were given by him in his presence. He deposed that these sheets bear signatures as witness and accused Chander Prakash used to operate saving bank account no. 28458 in Nehru Place branch of Canara Bank. He deposed that Ex. PW5/55 to 69 are the cheques which were received in Nehru Place Branch for withdrawal of the money from account no. 28458 issued by Yoginder Kumar received in normal course of banking business and were passed by him for payment. He deposed that all the 15 cheques bear his initials regarding passing of cheque for payment and he has seen credit slip Ex. PW5/7 to 74. He deposed that the credit slips are in respect of the clearing cheques on Ex. PW5/75 he had put his signatures for cancelling the the same for the purpose of verification of the signatures and Ex. PW5/76 to PW5/77 to Ex. PW5/79 were demand drafts which were received in Nehru Place Branch for clearing and all three bear the seal of the receipt of the drafts in the bank. He deposed that the proceeds of those bank draft were credited to account no. 28458 vide statement of account no. PW4/D dated 02.03.1990 at mark A and dated 10.03.1990 at mark B and third entry is dated 28.11.89 at mark C and all these entries bear his initials but putting the initials on the original ledger sheet Ex. PW4/D and he released the credit slips and he handed over documents to CBI vice Ex. PW5/80 which bears his signatures.
13 PW6 P Venogopal deposed that he was posted as Manager in Nehru Place Branch of Canara Bank from June 1990 to June 1995 and on specimen writing Ex. PW5/1 to 4 he had signed as a witness in the CBI office. He deposed CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 6 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 that these writings were given by accused Chander Prakash and on the request of the CBI he had presented the blank pay in slips, cheques and handed over documents to the CBI vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/A and he has seen the original ledger sheet EX. PW6/B which was also handed over vide Ex. PW6/A. He deposed that it pertains to account no. 26543 and ledger sheet is maintained by the bank in normal course of its business and he had handed over the specimen signatures card Ex. PW6/C which pertains to account opening from Ex. PW3/A to Ex. PW6/D is the original ledger sheet pertaining to account no. 54106 and it was maintained in Nehru Place Branch of Canara Bank. He deposed that letter Ex. PW6/E was received by Nehru Place Branch from Nav Yug Market Ghaziabad Branch of Canara Bank along with forwarding memo Ex. PW6/F in duplicate and this letter was received for transfer of saving bank account no. 28458 and the letters were received in normal course of business of our branch. He deposed that Ex. PW6/G is another seizure memo vide which he handed over the documents mentioned therein to the IO and it bears his signatures. He further deposed that whenever a demand draft is presented in the bank, it is accompanied by a credit slip and DD is sent to the concerned banker through clearing. It was maintained in normal official business and the entries regarding issuance of the cheques books used to be made in it. He deposed that on 24.10.1989 vide entry no A, at page 104, a cheque book of ten leafs was issued against saving bank account no. 26543 and it was acknowledged by one Ramakant who signed against this entry which has already been marked as Q 233. He deposed that Ex PW6/I is another cheque book issue register maintained in Nehru Place Branch in normal official course vide entry at point A at page 144 a cheque book of 10 leafs were issued to the account holder of account no. 28458 who acknowledged the cheque book by signing at point already marked Q-224. He deposed that Ex. PW6/K is another cheque book vide entry mark A was issued to the account holder of account no. 28458 who acknowledged the cheque book by signing at point Q-225 at page no. 6 of this register. He further deposed that on 06.03.1990 another cheque book was issued against the above account which was acknowledged by one Rajiv Srivastava by signing at point Q-226 at page no 40 of the above said. Vide same register another cheque book was issued against the same account number and account holder Yoginder Kumar himself acknowledged the cheque book by putting CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 7 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 his signatures at point Q227 at page no. 77 of the same register. He further deposed that outward clearing register is maintained in our bank regarding the cheques or the drafts which are lost in bank and sent for clearing and outward clearing register is maintained in normal course of official duties. He further deposed that Ex. PW6/K are in 14 sheets duly attested by him of outward clearing register and these sheets bears his initials. He deposed that there are 12 entries regarding the clearance of 12 DDs which are at point A1 to A12 and there is another entry at point A13 which is about the clearance of DD worth Rs. 1,89,785. He further deposed that another entry at point A14 is about the same draft which has been mentioned at entry no. A12 and there are two entries about the same draft because the draft was returned and then presented again. He deposed that he received the proceeds of the 13 drafts mentioned in Ex. PW6/L from Syndicate Bank and in case these 13 drafts are not genuine Syndicate Bank is the looser. Ex. PW6/M1 to M3 are the requisitioned sheets for issuance of the cheque books and these were received in their bank in the normal official course of banking business and the cheque books were issued against these slips. He deposed that Ex. PW5/1 to Ex. PW5/10 are the specimen on the demand drafts and not on the cheques. Ex. PW6/N1 to N2 are the specimen writing of accused Chander Prakash. The said writing given in his presence as well as in presence of PW5.
14 PW7 Bishamber Dayal deposed that in the year 1989 he was posted as clerk at Nehru Place Branch of Canara Bank and Ex. PW4/C account opening form was produced before him since he was working as temporary supervisor on 21.09.1989 and it bears his signatures at point A. He verified the signatures of the introducer Arvind Kumar Srivastava and he signed in his presence at point Q33 B. He deposed that Ex. PW4/D the original ledger sheet of account of Arvind Kumar the entries therein are under his handwriting and he has initialed against the entries as supervisor. He deposed that Ex. PW6/B original ledger sheet also has been initialed by him at points A and Ex. PW7/a cash credit voucher which was received in normal official course and he released the cash credit by putting his initials at point A. Ex. PW7/2 to Ex. PW7/4 are clearing credit vouchers which were checked and released by him and the amount of this credit voucher was credited to the respective accounts.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 8 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 15 PW8 Anil Kumar Gupta deposed that he was posted in Nehru Place in 1989-90 as officer in Canara Bank and he had passed cheque Ex. PW8/A and EX. PW8/B for payment. He has seen debit voucher Ex. PW8/C by which the amount of Rs. 1,85,536/- was debited on the account clearing cheque return unpaid in saving bank account no. 28458. Ex. PW4/D bears his initial at points X with regard to passing of the cheques for Rs. 15000/- and another cheque for 25000/-.
16 PW 9 A.D. Pai deposed that in the year 1989-90 he was posted as an officer in Central Accounts Office, Syndicate Bank and the Central Accounts Office function was a clearing house for Syndicate Bank branches in Delhi. He further deposed that all the cheques/drafts to be presented to various banks have to be sent through Central Accounts Office and similarly the inward instruments from various banks to Syndicate Bank have to be collected from Central Accounts Officer for further transmission to various branches. As far as demand drafts are concerned, Central Accounts Office has to honour them for payment after due verification. He further deposed that if the demand draft issued by any branch of Syndicate Bank of out of Delhi and is lodged in any bank in Delhi it will come for clearing in Central Accounts Office provided it is drawn on CAO, New Delhi. Ex. PW 9/I to Ex. PW 9/IX, Ex. PW 4/F, Ex. PW 5/77 to Ex. PW 5/79 were received in normal official course for clearing in their office. Ex. PW 9/X to Ex. PW 9/XXII are computerised statement sheets in which the details of the cleared drafts/cheques are entered in Central Accounts Office in normal official course. He deposed that details of clearance of 13 demand drafts have been entered in these sheets at point A to M and out of 13 demands drafts there were two entries with regard to one demand draft at point A to K. Syndicate Bank paid the money against to the above 13 demand drafts. Ex. PW 9/XXIII is the seizure memo which bears my signature at point A, vide this seizure memo be handed over demand draft and computerized sheet to the IO. He deposed that in this case the demand draft is returned on the same day, it would be presumed that the same has been honoured.
17 PW 10 P.N. Hedge deposed that in the year 1989-90, he was posted as Manager in Central Accounts Office, Syndicate Bank, New Delhi. During the CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 9 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 year 1990,he received a phone call from Canara Bank, Nehru Place enquiring about payment of DD issued by their Hapur Branch then he verified a computerized. Ex. PW 9/X to Ex. PW 9/XXII are the computerized sheets and these were prepared by their Zonal Office, EDP Section. He deposed that on verification, he found the discrepancies in branch Serial Number and on finding of above discrepancies, he verified the record deeply in respect of payments of Hapur DDs and found that the particular discrepancy was occuring in respect of 11 DDs amounting to about Rs. 10,00,000/-. He further deposed that he enquired this matter on phone with Mr. P.K. Rastogi who was Manager Incharge of Hapur branch and also inform the discrepancy to the Assistant General Manager and as per his oral instructions he went to Hapur branch and verified the records at the branch as well as its EC and found all the 11 drafts were not accounted for in the books of accounts of in Hapur branch. He further deposed that he confirmed from Mr. Prabhat Kumar about his signature on Ex. PW 9/I to Ex. PW 9/IX, Ex. PW 5/77 to Ex. PW 5/79 and Ex. PW 4/F and he confirmed that these are not his signatures. He deposed that Ex. PW 9/X to Ex. PW 9/XXII, he confirmed that Syndicate Bank made the payment against the 13 drafts.
18 PW 11 Prabhat Kumar Rastogi deposed that during the period 1988 to 1991 he was posted at Hapur branch of Syndicate Bank as Manager. There were also one Extension Counter. He know accused Chander Prakash Srivastava who joined the branch in 1988. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/A is the attendance register of the Extension Counter of Hapur branch, Syndicate Bank which is maintained in normal course. He deposed that Ex. PW 9/I to Ex. PW 9/IX , Ex. PW 4/F, Ex. PW 5/77 to Ex. PW 5/79 do not bear his signatures at points Q2, Q4, Q6, Q8, Q10, Q12, Q14, Q16, Q18, Q20, Q22, Q24 and Q26. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/B1 to B3 are his specimen signatures which he gave to the IO of the case. Ex. PW11/C is the seizure memo signed by him at point vide which he handed over documents to the IO. He deposed that he can recognized the handwriting of Chander Prakash. Ex. PW 11/D bear the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava at portion mark A 30 and it bears his endorsement at point B and his signature at point C. He deposed that reverse portion of this Ex. Also bear the handwriting of Chander Prakash. Ex. PW 11/E to Ex. PW 11/K bear the CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 10 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 handwriting and signatures of Chander Prakash at points already marked A 31 to A 37, Ex. PW 11/E bear his handwriting and endorsement at point B, Ex. PW 11/F bear his handwriting and signature at point B, Ex. PW 11/G to Ex. PW 11/K also bear his handwriting and signature at point B. He deposed Ex. PW 11/L is DD issued register of Extension counter of Syndicate branch at Hapur and this register was maintained in normal official course with regard to making of entries and Extension Counter was also under his control. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/M and Ex. PW 11/N are the attendance register of main branch of the Syndicate Bank, Hapur, Vistar Patal. He deposed that PL means Privilege Leave, SL means Sick Leaves and there are no signatures of C.P. Srivastava against his name, he might have been working in the base branch on the said dates. He deposed that there are signatures of C.P Srivastava in Extension Counter, Attendance Register, he worked in the Extension Counter as Officer Incharge and at a time there used to work only one officer at the Extension Counter. He deposed that it was possible to come and go for Hapur to Delhi within one and half hour or so and the DDs issue register are maintained for making entries regarding issuance of the DDs. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/O, Ex. PW 11/P are the DD issue register of Extension Counter of Syndicate Bank, Hapur. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/Q and Ex. PW 11/R, the DD issued register of main branch of Syndicate Bank. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/S is another DD issue register of main branch Syndicate Bank, Hapur. He deposed that DDs which were supposed to be cleared from Central Accounts Office, Delhi and were issued by the main branch and Syndicate Bank, Hapur were entered in folio sheet no. 1 to 31 in the Head of Central Accounts Office, New Delhi. He deposed that the fraud was detected in the year 1990 and accused C. P Srivastava remained unauthorizedly absent after the detection of the fraud. He deposed that Ex. PW 11/T is office order book of main branch Syndicate Bank, Hapur and this register was maintained for record of holding the records of the keys of the safe custody main branch and demand drafts leafs were kept in safe custody. He deposed that this register at page 1 to 4 is regarding the first set of the custodial in coloumn of " received by" there are names of the officers who were the custodial of the keys on the respective dates. He deposed that page no. 5 and 6 of this register is the second set portion as per page no. 5 and 6, the officer whose name have been mentioned in the column of "received by" they were joint CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 11 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 custodial of the keys. Ex. PW 11/U is the seizure memo vide which he handed over the documents mentioned therein to the IO. Ex. PW 11/V is the another seizure memo which bears his signature.
19 PW 12 Siri Kishan Sharma deposed that during the year 1983 to 1990 he worked in Extension Counter of Syndicate Bank, Hapur and he know accused Chanderprakash Srivastava and Chanderprakash Srivastava was the Officer Incharge of Extension Counter, Hapur and DDs were kept in safe custody and keys of safe custody used to be with Chanderprakash and another set with the cashier. He deposed that sometimes Chanderprakash Srivastava used to attend office late since he used to come from Ghaziabad during the tenure of Extension Counter. He further deposed that sometimes Gopal Singh driver of the Chanderprakash used to visit the Extension Counter. He deposed that whenever he used to come late or used to leave office, he used to carry the keys in safe custody.
20 PW13 S.K. Ahuja deposed that from 1987 to July 1991 he was posted as Sub Manager at Hapur Branch and Hapur Branch had its extension counter at S.S.V. College Hapur. He deposed that Ex. PW13/A, Ex. PW13/B and Ex. PW13/C are the baking notes relating to receipt of demand draft received in Hapur Branch and its extension counter. He deposed that Ex. PW13/D is the security items stock register and it is maintained in normal course of banking business. He further deposed that this register was maintained in Hapur Branch of Syndicate Bank and all the stocks such as DDs etc received in the branch are mentioned in this register and as per this register, he can say that Ex. PW9/s, DD leafs was not the leaf of Hapur Branch and on enquiry it was revealed that it belong to Patiala Branch of Syndicate Branch. He deposed that as per Ex. PW11/S, DD leafs Sr. no 286402/611 was the last demand draft issued by Hapur Branch on 30.12.88 and from 01.01.89 new register was to be introduced as per H.O. guidelines. He deposed that therefore, entries in Ex. PW11/S regarding issuance of the draft were stopped to be entered in this register. He deposed that 31st December and 1st January were the bank holidays therefore, the first working day of the bank in the year 1989 was the 2nd January and on 2nd January first demand draft bearing no.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 12 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 286410 onwards were issued. He further deposed that all the demand drafts issued are entered in the DD issue register and from 2nd January 89 onwards DD issue register Ex. PW11/R was maintained. He further deposed that no DD bearing no. 286403 to 286409 were issued by the Syndicate Bank.
21 PW14 H. Narshimhan deposed that in the year 1987 he was working as Spl. Asst. in the Nehru Place Branch of Canara Bank and he left Nehru Place branch on transfer in the year 1994. He deposed that Ex. PW3/B is the specimen signatures card pertaining to account no. 54106 and it bears his intitial at point A. He deposed that the account holder Arvind signed before him on this card which are at point B and Ex. PW6/B is the original ledger sheet and he initialed the entries mentioned in this ledger sheet. The entries which had been initialed by him are at point B and Ex. PW6/H is cheque bok issue register and all the cheque books issued to the account holder are entered in this register. He deposed that the entry at page no. 104 at point A of this register is under his hand writing and a cheque book was issued to the account holder Ramakant who signed before him at point Q to 233. He deposed that Ex. PW14/A and B are the withdrawal cheques which were passed for payment by him. His initial and endorsement on these cheques is at pint A and Ex. PW14/C is the credit voucher. He deposed that the proceeds of Rs. 100/- were credited vide this credit voucher in the account no. 26543 and his initial and endorsement on this credit voucher is at point A. 22 PW15 A.K. Mahajan deposed that he was posted in Nehru Place branch as officer from 1986 to 1990 ad Ex. PW4/D is the original ledger sheet. The entries in this ledger sheet were initialed by him, his initials are at encircled portions D and E. Ex. PW15/A is the withdrawal cheque which was received in the bank in normal official course. He further deposed that he passed the same for payment and his endorsement and initials on this chequr are at point A. He further deposed that Ex. PW15/B is another withdrawal cheque which was received in normal official course which was passed for payment by him and it bears his initial and the endorsement at point A. He further deposed that Ex. PW15/C and Ex. PW15/D are also withdrawal cheque which were passed for payment by him and his initial and endorsement on these cheques are at point A. He further deposed CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 13 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 that Ex. PW6/K is the cheque book issue register. The cheque book was issued to account holder Yoginder Kumar vide entry at point A at page no. 77. He further deposed that the initials against this entry as supervisor are his which are at point B. He further deposed that Ex. PW15/E and F are the credit voucher and these credit voucher were received in normal official course in the bank. He further deposed that the proceeds of these credit voucher Ex. PW15/F were credited in account no. 28458 under his initials.
23 PW16 Ravi Shankar deposed that he joined Canara Bank, Nehru Place in 1981 and he remained posted in Nehru Place branch till 1997. He further deposed that Ex. PW4/D is the statement of account and the entries in this ledger sheet were made by him on 09.10.89, 09.11.89, 10.11.89, 12.02.90, 28.02.90 etc. He further deposed that Ex. PW15/D and C bears his signatures at point B regarding payment of the cash against these cheques.
24 PW17 Rajiv Manchanda deposed that during the year 1988 to June 1991 he was posted as an officer in Nehru Place Branch. He deposed that Ex. PW17/1 to Ex PW17/4 are the credit vouchers with regard to the clearing of the instruments. These vouchers were passed by him for ledger posting and sent for clearing and these bears his signatures at point A. 25 PW18 Jugesh Chander deposed that during year 1985 to 1992 he was posted as Manager in Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank. He further deposed that Ex. PW18/1 is the office copy of the letter sent by him to the Divisional Manager, Syndicate Bank, CAO regarding missing of one DD leaf bearing no. 156954 and this DD leaf belong to Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank and it was received vide packing note Ex. PW18/2 from Syndicate Bank, Stationary records division, head office, Manipal. He further deposed that this leaf was part and parcel of DD mentioned at Sl No. C containing DD leaf bearing n. 156901 to 157000 and Ex. PW9/II is that DD leaf which was missing from their branch. He deposed that this DD leaf has been used as a demand draft purported to have been issued by Hapur Branch of the Syndicate Bank since, this DD leaf belonged to our branch therefore, question of issuance of any demand draft vide this leaf from Hapur CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 14 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Branch of Syndicate Bank does not arise. He further deposed that DD leaf after receipt from head office are entrusted to Incharge of DD section. He further deposed that this DD leaf along with other DD leaf was received in their branch on 28.03.88 and Chander Prakash Srivastava was Incharge of DD section and as such, the DD page containing this DD leaf was entrusted to him. Ex. PW18/D to Ex. PW18/5 are certified copy of the attendance register is maintained in the branch in the normal official course. Ex. PW10/3 bears the signatures of Chander Prakash Srivastava at point A regarding his presence in the branch on 28.03.88. He further deposed that he know the signatures and handwriting since he had worked under him. Ex. PW18/6 is also the certified copy of the attendance register, Patiala Branch of Syndicate. He further deposed that PW 18/7 and 8 is the certified, copy of safe custody key moment register and this register is maintained for entrustment of the keys of the safe custody. He deposed that vide this register it was also recorded that who were the joint custodian of the keys and on 28.03.1988 as per this register, Sh. Chander Prakash Srivastava accused was the Joint Custodian and the DD leafs are kept in safe custody. He further deposed that Ex. PW18/9 and 10 are the certified copies of DD issue register of Patiala Branch. He further deposed that this register is maintained in normal official course for entering the details of the demand draft issued from the branch. He further deposed that attendance register, DD issue register and key moment register Ex. PW18/3 to 9 have been duly certified by him as per bankers books of evidence. Act and same bears his seal and signatures at point A. He further deposed that DD leaf bearing no. 156954 was not used their branch for issuance of demand draft since it was found missing. He deposed that Ex. PW18/11 is the seizure memo vide which he handed over documents mentioned therein to the IO and it bears his signatures at point A. He deposed that PW18/12 is the letter written by him to SP, CBI New Delhi and it bears his signatures at point A. Ex. PW18/13 is the memorandum receipt in the branch vide which Chander Prakash Srivastava was transferred from Durga Pur Branch to Patiala Branch and it bears an endorsement in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava at point A. He deposed that Chander Prakash Srivastava posted in Patiala for about 3 years.
26 PW19 Ram Nath deposed that during the year 1987 onwards, he was CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 15 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 the Divisional Manager of Ghaziabad Division which consisted of branches of the District including Hapur Branch and he remained posted in the abovesaid capacity up to year May 1992. He deposed that as per banking instructions of their bank and all the security items such as demand drafts etc. He further deposed that they are kept under the joint custody of two persons in the safe and in Hapur Branch and its extension counter situated at SSV College premises also were doing same practice.
27 PW20 Chander Kumar deposed that during the year April 1977 to July 1980 he was posted as attender in Hapur Branch of Syndicate bank and he used to be posted sometimes to attend the work in the extension counter at SSV college. He deposed that in his second tenure he was again posted in the Hapur Branch as a clerk from the year May 1983 to July 1991 and there was no practice of shocking of number demand draft previously issued before issuance of New Demand draft and he know Chander Prakash Srivastava accused since he remained posted with him as an officer of branch at Hapur.
28 PW21 Jagpal Singh deposed that in the year 1990, he was posted in the same branch as Clerk and OSC is prepared for collection of amount of cheque for clearing from out station. Ex. PW6/F was prepared by him and Ex. PW6/F is in duplicate.
29 PW22 Satypal Gupta deposed that in the year 1990, he was posted as Manager in Naintal Bank branch of Ghaziabad and Ex. PW22/A is the seizure memo vide which he handed over documents mentioned therein to the CBI and it bears his signatures. He deposed that Ex PW22/B 1 to B4 are certified copies of FDR and these were attested by him while comparing with the originals. He deposed that Ex. PW22/C is the true extract of ledger folio of saving bank account 5183 held in the name of Chander Prakash Srivasatava and Smt. Saviate Srivastav. He deposed that in this account a loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- was granted and the loan amount was credited vide entry at point A and this loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- was granted against the FDR Ex. PW22/B1 to B4.
PW23 K.S.L. Srivastav deposed that in the year 1990 he was posted CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 16 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 as Branch Manager State Bank of India Fatehpur. Ex. PW23/A is the seizure memo vide which he handed over the documents mentioned therein to CBI officer and it bears his signatures. He deposed that Ex. PW23/A2 is the application for issuance of demand draft and it was received in their bank in normal official course of banking business on 07.07.1990 and it bears the seal of receipt at point A. He deposed that vide this application Rs. 75,000/- was deposited for issuance of demand draft. Ex. PW23/A3 is the demand draft which was issued against Ex. PW23/A2 and the demand draft bear his signatures at point A and it also bears the signatures of accountant M.S. Chaudhary at point B whose signatures he can identify since he has worked under him.
30 PW24 Sh. V.K. Sehgal deposed that on 24.01.1991 he attended CBI office and on that day, in his presence specimen and handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava Ex. PW24/A1 to A101 was taken and his signatures was also obtained at point A on all sheets. He deposed that on the same day a specimen handwriting of Arvind Kumar Srivastava (correctly identified) were also taken in his presence. The said specimen writings are Ex. PW24/B1 to B56 and these sheets also bears his signatures at point A. He further deposed that specimen writing of one Rajiv Srivastava were also taken in his presence on the same day which are Ex. PW24/C1 to C5 and all sheets bear his signatures at point A. He further deposed that on 22.01.1991 he accompanied search party of CBI and a search was conducted in his presence after observing all formalities. The search list Ex. PW24/D bears his signatures at point A. Ex. PW24/E is the statement given by Chander Prakash Srivastava, it was given in his presence on 23.01.1991 and all the three sheets of statement bear his signatures at point A. He further deposed that he know Sh. G.S. Raju since he has worked under him in Division Office, Ghaziabad. Sh. S.J.S. Raju is no more and he was Divisional Manager at that time. He deposed that Ex. PW24/F bear the signatures of Sh. S.G.S. Raju at point A. The letters S.A.G. Raju in capital letter is written wrongly by someone. Actually the initial of Mr. Raju whose signatures are at point A was S.G.S. Raju.
31 PW25 A.K. Mittal deposed that in the year 1989 he was posted as Tailer Clerk in Ghaziabad Branch of Central Bank of India and his wife Smt. CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 17 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Satyawati was agent for Unit Trust of India in the year 1989. He deposed that Ex. PW25/A1 to A4 are the applications form for purchasing UTI certificates and all the four UTI certificates applications bear seal with code number of his wife at point A. He deposed that his wife got issued four certificates against these four applications. Ex. PW25/A1 to A3 are filled in his handwriting and Ex. PW25/A2 also bears his signatures at point B on the reverse of the application.
32 PW26 Smt. Satyawati deposed that in the year 1989 she was working as agent for Unit Trust of India and sometimes she used to take assistance of her husband by way of filling up application forms for purchase of UTI. Ex. PW25/A1 to A4 bear his seal and agent code number at point A. She deposed that she got issued four UTI certificates in the name of applicants mentioned in the application form.
33 PW27 H.C. Kukreja deposed that in the year 1989-90 he was posted as Staff Officer/ Deputy Manager/ Manager in UTI. He was incharge of operations of various schemes of UTI and he was incharge of issuance of UTI certificates MISG90 Scheme and MISG13. He deposed that on receipt of application for purchase of UTI certificate alongwith cheque or the cash in the event of realisation of the amount for which the certificate has been sought for, the certificate are issued. These two types of certificates used to be kept pre-printed with fascimine signature of chairman and executive trustee of UTI. He deposed that the certificate used to be filled in and issued to the applicant under his supervision. He deposed that exhibit PW 27/1 is the certificate issued of MISG90. The details of applicants/ certificate holder mentioned in the certificate itself. Exhibit PW27/ A2 to four are the certificates of MISG13 scheme. All the certificate were issued under his supervision alongwith post dated cheques/interest warrants which have been referred in seizure memo dated 19.11.1990 mark X at Sl. No. 1,3&4. He deposed that the interest warrants are collectively Ex. PW27/B. Ex. PW 27/C is the letter under the signature of S.S. Ratra whose signature he can identify since he has worked under him and his signature is at point A. Ex. PW27/D1 to D18 are the paid interest warrants which were issued by UTI in favour respective certificates holder.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 18 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 34 PW28 Harish Dhamija deposed that Ex. PW 28/A is the seizure memo which bears his signature and vide this seizure memo he handed over the documents to CBI. He further deposed that in the year 1991. He was Sub Manager in Navyug Market Gaziabad and Ex. PW28/B1 and B2 are the cheques which were received in their branch in normal course of banking business. Vide Ex. PW28/B1 a cash of Rs. 40,000/- was withdrawn and vide Ex. PW 28/B2 a demand draft was requested to be issued. Ex. PW28/C is the application for issuance of the draft which was received in normal course alongwith Ex. PW 28/B2. He deposed that draft no. 303540/1255 for Rs. 58,901/- favouring Vice Chairman GDA by issued by their branch. Ex. PW28/D1 and D2 are the pay in slip vide which amount were deposited. Ex. PW28/D3 is also the pay in slip. All the three pay in slip were received in normal official course of banking business. Ex. PW28/E 1&2 are the account opening form and statement of account duly certified by him. His endorsement is at point A on both these exhibits. Ex.PW28/E1 has been signed by Sh. S.C. Gupta at point B whose signature he can identify since he has worked with him.
35 PW 29 R.P. Arora deposed that on 24.01.1991 he was posted as Sub Manager in Corporation Bank, Lodhi Road, Branch Delhi and on that day he had gone to CBI office. He deposed that the specimen handwriting Ex. PW24/A1 to A101 of Chander Prakash Srivastava were taken in his presence. He deposed that on that day the specimen of another person Arvind Kumar Srivastava Ex. PW24/B1 to B6 were also taken. He deposed that he will not in a position to identify both the accused person today. He deposed that he signed all the sheets of the specimen taken at point B. 36 PW30 R.Mahesh deposed that during the period June 1990 to June 1991 he was posted in Canara Bank Navyug Market Branch Gaziabad as Officer. Ex. PW 6/E was dealt with by him and it bears his signature at point A and this was received for transfer of S.B. A/c no.28458. Ex.PW6/F was prepared by clerk under his instructions and it bears his signature at Point A, the cheque book bearing cheque no. 589496 to 500 was destroyed. The application Ex.PW6/E was forwarding to Nehru Place Branch for transfer of the account Ex. PW6/F is in CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 19 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 duplicate and duplicate copy also bears his signature at Point A. 37 PW31 G.S. Chawala deposed that Ex. PW31/A is the seizure memo vide which articles mentioned thereto were produced by one I.N. Srivastava in his presence and it bears his signatures at point A. The article mentioned were seized by CBI Inspector. He deposed that Sh. I.N. Srivastava and H.S. Rawat had signed in his presence at point B and C respectively. Another seizure memo mark Y bears his signature and vide this seizure memo Rs. 20,000/- were produced before me.
38 PW32 Mohinder Singh deposed that the documents of this case were received for examination in laboratory vide SP CBI, SCB, new Delhi vide letter no. 3/14/90/SPL/DLI/4749 datd 20.08.1991. The details of documents received with the letter is as follows:
Documents stamped and marked by him as Q1, Q2 on Ex. PW9/1, Q3, Q4 and QA on Ex. PW9/11, Q5 and Q6 on Ex. PW9/III, Q7 and Q8 on Ex. PW9/IV, Q9 and Q10 on Ex. PW9/V, Q11, Q12 and Q12A on Ex. PW9/VI, Q13 and Q14 on Ex. PW4/F, Q15 and Q16A on Ex. PW9/VII, Q17 and Q18 on Ex. PW5/77, Q19, Q20 and Q20A on Ex. PW5/78, Q21 and Q22 on Ex. PW9/VIII, Q23 and Q24 and Q24A on Ex. PW5/77, Q25 and Q26 on Ex. PW9/IX, Q27, Q28, Q28A & Q29 on Ex. PW3/A, Q30 and Q31 on Ex. PW6/E, Q32, Q33 and Q33 A to C on Ex. PW4/C, Q34, Q35 on Ex. PW4/B, Q36 to 39 on Ex. PW15/A, Q40 to Q69 on Ex. PW5/55 to PW5/61, Q70 to 73 and Q72A on Ex. PW8/A, Q74 to 77 on Ex. PW8/8, Q78 to Q89 on Ex. PW5/62 to 64, Q90 to 93 Ex. PW32/A1, Q94 to 107 on Ex. PW5/65 to 68, Q108 to 111 on Ex. PW15/B, Q112 to 131 on Ex. PW32/A2 to 16, Q132 to Q135 on Ex. PW5/D, Q136 to 138 on Ex. PW15/C, Q149 to 141 on Ex. PW5/74, Q142 to 144 on Ex. PW17/3, Q 145 to 147 on Ex. PW32/A7 to 148 and 149 on Ex. PW5/70, Q150 to 158A, Q158 on Ex. PW7/2 to 4, Q159 to 160 on Ex. PW17/4, Q161 and 162 on Ex. PW5/71, Q163 and 164 on Ex. PW5/72, Q165 to 167 on Ex. PW15/E, Q168 to Q171on Ex. PW32/A8, Q172 to Q175 on Ex. PW14/A, Q176 to 179 Ex PW32/A9, Q180 to 183 on Ex. PW14/B, Q184, 184 on Ex. PW14/C, Q185 to 187 on Ex. PW17/A, Q188 to Q190 on Ex. PW17/2, Q191 to 192 on Ex. PW6/E, Q193 to 195 on Ex. PW5/75, Q196 to 198 Ex. PW5/76, Q199 to Q200 on Ex.CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 20 of 39
RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 PW7/1, Q201 to 204 on Ex. PW32/A10, Q205 to 208 on Ex. PW5/69, Q209, Q210 on Ex. PW5/73, Q211 and 212 on Ex PW15/F, Q213, 214 on Ex. PW6/M1, Q 215 to 217 on Ex. PW6/M2, Q218 to 222 on Ex. PW6/M3, Q223 on Ex. PW6/H, Q224 on Ex. PW6/J and Q225 to 227 on Ex. PW6/K. He further deposed that for the purpose of comparison admittedly genuine writings and signatures purported to be of Sh. Chander Prakash Srivastava were supplied which was stamped and marked by him as A1 to A6 on Ex. PW32/81 to 86. He deposed that A7 to A29 on Ex. PW32/87 to B29 respectively, A30 to A37 on Ex. PW11/D to E, A38 to A39 on Ex. PW28/B1 to B2A on Ex. PW28/D3, A41 on Ex. PW28/C, A42 to A45 on Ex. PW32/B, 30 to B33, A45A to A46 to A57 in a diary of Syndicate Bank which is Ex. PW32/B34 to B46. He deposed that admittedly genuine writings and signatures purported to be of Sh. Arvind Kumar Srivastava which were stamped and marked by him as A61 to A67 and are now Ex. PW32/B47 to B50 respectively. He further deposed that specimen and signatures purported to be of Sh. Chander Prakash Srivastava were also supplied which were stamped and marked by him as S1 to S101 on Ex. PW24/A 1 to A101, S102 to 122 on Ex. PW5/1 to 10 S123 to S139 on Ex. PW5/11 to PW5/18, S140 to 148 and S150 to 153 on Ex. PW5/19 to 24, S154 to S237 on Ex. PW5/25 to PW5/54, S238 to S240 on Ex. PW6/N1 to S241 to 243 on Ex. PW6/N2. He deposed that specimen writing and signatures purported to be of Sh Arvind Kumar Srivastava were stamped and marked by him as S244 to S299 on Ex. PW24/B1 to B56. Specimen writings and signatures purported to be of Sh. Rajiv Srivastava stamped and marked by him S305 to S309 and are now Ex. PW24/C1 to C5. He deposed that specimen writings and signatures purported to be of one Savita Srivastava stamped and marked by him as S300 to S304 on Ex. PW32/C1 to C5. Specimen writings and signatures purported to be of one Chander Kumar were stamped and marked by him as S310 to 320 on Ex. PW32/C6 to C10, specimen writings and signatures purported to be of Sh. Prabhat Kumar Rastogi were also supplied which were stamped and marked by him as S321 to S323 on Ex. PW11/B1 to B3. He further deposed that after careful and through examination of all the original documents supplied to him he came to conclusion that the person who wrote the blue enclosed signatures stamped and marked S321 to S323 did not write the red enclosed signatures. Similarly stamped and marked Q2, CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 21 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Q4, Q4A, Q6, Q8, Q10, Q12A, Q14, Q16, Q16A, Q18, Q20, Q20A, Q22, Q24, Q24A and Q26; the person who wrote the blue enclosed writings and signatures stamped and marked S1 to S148, S150 to S243, A1 to A36 and A38 to A45 also wrote the red enclosed writings. Similarly stamped and marked Q1 to Q4, Q4A, Q5 to Q12, Q12A, Q13 to Q16, Q17 to Q20, Q20A, Q21 to Q24, 24A, Q26, Q29, Q31 to 33, Q33A, Q33B, Q33C, Q34 to 39, Q42, Q43, Q46 to 48, Q51 to 72, 72A, Q73 to 92, Q94 to Q118, Q120 to 126, Q128 to Q134, Q136 to 138, Q140 to Q142, Q144 to Q158, 158A, Q159 to Q183, Q185 to 215, Q217 to 219, Q222 to 225 and Q227. He further deposed that the person who wrote the blue enclosed writings and signatures stamped and marked S244 to S299 and A61 to A67 also wrote and red enclosed writing and signatures. Similarly, stamped and marked Q27, Q28, Q28A, Q30, Q184 and Q184A, the person who wrote the blue enclosed writings stamped and marked S300 to 304 also wrote and red enclosed writings similarly, stamped marked Q135 to 139. The person who wrote the blue enclosed writings and red enclosed signatures similarly stamped and marked Q93, Q119, Q126, Q226. He deposed that he typed opinion containing the aforesaid conclusion is Ex. PW32/D1 which bears his signatures as well as the signatures of Sh. Santok Singh the then GEQD who had also independently examined the documents and came to the same conclusion as of himself. He deposed that he identify his signatures on this opinion, the detailed reason in support of his opinion Ex. PW32/D1 are also produced which are own 9 typed sheets each sheet bearing his signatures and are not Ex. PW32/D2. The relevant documents of this case were photographed in the laboratory by a Government Photographer under his supervisions and guidance although photography was done only for the purpose of record and his examination is based upon original documents alone and he also produced enlarged photographs of the documents which are correct reproduction of their corresponding originals. These photographs are on 214 sheets and are Ex. PW32/D3 to D216. He deposed that he also brought their originals negatives which are in 7 wallets and are Ex. PW32/D217 to 223.
39 PW33 Ajay Kumar Sharma Assistant Accountant deposed that for the allotment of flats/houses of GDA a separate file was maintained and applicant has to apply for allotment. He deposed that in the event of allotment a letter is sent to CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 22 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 the allottee and allottee in turn file affidavit and thereafter the possession of the alloted flat is given to the allottee. He has brought the original two files relating to flat no.K1092 and 1093(LIC in section 23 Ghaziabad) favouring Smt. Krishan Kumari @ Krishan Srivastava and C.P. Srivastava respectively. Ex. PW33/A1 is the photocopy which I have compared with the original in the file Ex. PW33/A2 is the photocopy of the affidavit submitted by the allottee in response to the allotment letter and A3 is the copy of the possession letter vide which possession was given on 26.08.1986. Likewise, Ex.PW33/A4 is the copy of application favour C.P. Srivastava Ex. PW33/A5 is the copy of the affidavit and Ex. PW 33/A6 is the copy of possession letter. Possession of flat no. K1093 was also given to the allottee on 26.08.1996.
40 PW34 K.R. Anand deposed that he was posted as Asst. Manager in Hapur Branch of Syndicate Bank during the year 1985 to 1989 and there was and extension counter of Hapur Branch Syndicate Bank at SSV College. He deposed that he worked at the extension counter and he knew Chander Prakash Srivastava who worked with him at Hapur Branch as well as in extension counter and he can identify his signatures and handwriting as he has seen him writing and signing. He further deposed that the packing note is meant for receipt of blank demand draft leaves and cheques leaves etc. Vide Ex. PW13/B, he received DD leaves mentioned therein and it bears his signatures at point A. Ex. PW9/I to VI are demand drafts which are in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava. He further deposed that Ex. PW4/F, PW9/VII, PW5/77, PW5/78, PW9/VIII, and PW5/79 are also in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava.
41 PW35 Ved Prakash deposed that he was posted in the Hapur Branch of Syndicate bank from 1988 to 1995 and there was an extension counter of Hapur Branch Syndicate Bank at SSV college. He further deposed that he was also posted at the extension counter and he knew Chander Prakash Srivastava since he was officer Incharge of Extension counter at the time of his tenure. He deposed that he can identify his handwriting and signatures. Sometimes Chander Prakash Srivastava used to attend office late and in that event he used to sent the keys through his brother in law. He deposed that Ex. PW15/A, B, C and D are the CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 23 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava and Ex. PW5/56, PW5/57, PW5/58, PW5/59, PW5/61, PW8/A, PW5/65, Ex. PW5/68, PW32/A2, PW32/A4, PW5/70, PW7/3, PW32/A7 are also in the handwriting of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. He deposed that Ex. PW5/75, 76, Ex. PW32/B42, PW32/B43 to B45 are also in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava. He deposed that Ex. PW11/D, E,F,G, H, I are also in the handwriting of accused Chander Prakash.
42 PW36 Y.L. Khanna deposed that he was posted as Manager operation in Razapur, Ghaziabad branch of Oriental Bank of Commerce from 1988 to 1991. Ex. PW36/A, is the account opening form relating to account no. 11367 to Smt. Savita Srivasatava w/o Chander Prakash Srivastava. He further deposed that he allowed to open this account and account opening form bears his signatures at point A. He deposed that Ex. PW36/B is another account opening form which was allotted by Shalinder Kakkar whose signatures he can identify as I have worked with him. He further deposed that PW36/C is another account opening from in favour of Chander Prakash Srivastava, Savita Srivastava and Mona Srivastava, daughter and also Master Bhanu Prakash. He further deposed that it was allowed to be open by Sh. S.P. Mehra and Satish Jain whose signatures are at point A and B which he identify since he has worked with them. He further deposed that Ex. PW36/D is the carbon copy of the seizure memo vide which he handed over certain documents mentioned therein to the IO and it bears his signatures at point A. He further deposed that Ex. PW36/E1 to 7 are the original ledger sheets pertaining to the accounts of Chander Prakash Srivasatava, Master Bhanu, Savita Srivastava, Monica Srivastava and Savita Srivastava respectively. He deposed that vide Ex. PW32/B23 an amount of Rs. One lakh was transferred to United Trust of India through clearing and collected by Central Bank of India is reflected in Ex. PW36/E3 is at point A. 43 PW 37 R.K. Singh deposed that he was posted as Spl. Assistant in Ghaziabad branch of India Overseas Bank during the period 1975 to July 1994. Ex. PW32/B30 is the account opening form which bears his signatures at point A. He deposed that he verified the signatures of Chander Prakash Srivastava account holder. He further deposed that the specimen signatures card is Ex.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 24 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 PW37/A which bears his signatures at point A and he verified the signatures of Chander Prakash Srivastava which appear at point B. He further deposed that signatures at point B were made by Chander Prakash Srivastava in his presence and Ex. PW32/B32 also bears his signatures at point A vide which he verified the signatures of introducer Billu who was working as Canteen Boy in their branch. He deposed that he also verified the signatures on introducer Billu on Ex. PW32/B30 and he also verified the signatures of introducer bill on Ex. PW32/B33 and his signatures are at point A. He further deposed that Ex. PW37/B is the withdrawal slip for withdrawal of amount of Rs. 50,000/- and he allowed to withdraw the amount vide his signatures at point A and it was also countersigned by the Manager Mr. Sevaram whose signatures he can identify since he has worked with him.
44 PW38 Inspector H.S. Rawat deposed that Ex. PW38/A is the FIR which was registered under the signatures of Sh. Kamlinder Pd. the then S.P. SCB whose signatures he can identify since he has worked with him and the FIR was registered in his presence. He deposed that it was registered on the basis of Ex PW24/F pertaining to the occurrence under investigation and before this FIR earlier a case was registered in PS Hapur, UP Police and the said case was closed by the UP police at the initial stage itself since the case was registered relating to the same offence. He deposed that Ex. PW38/B is the communication by S.P. Rural to SHO Hapur and the copy of Ex. PW38/B was received by him and it bears his endorsement and signatures at point A. He deposed that no material investigation was carried out by the UP police. The accused was facing trial relating to the same occurrence only in this court. He deposed that he investigated this case, collected the material and recorded the statements of witnesses, obtained the specimen signatures of accused persons and other persons which were given by them. He deposed that specimen and handwriting were given by accused persons and other which was referred to the handwriting expert who in turn submitted his report. He deposed that he arrested both the accused persons, interrogated them. Ex. PW38/C1, C2, C3 and C4 are the seizure memo under his handwriting vide which he collected documents mentioned therein. He deposed that Ex. PW38/D is the disclosure memo under his handwriting about the CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 25 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 disclosure made by accused Chander Prakash Srivastav and he also conducted the searches vide Ex. PW24/D. Ex. PW38/E1 is the seizure memo under the handwriting and signatures of the then Inspector D.P. Singh who collected the documents mentioned therein under his instructions whose signatures he can identify since he has worked with him. He deposed that Ex. PW38/E2 is the search memo vide he collected the searches at the residence of accused Arvind Kumar Srivastava whose signatures are at point A. He further deposed that Ex. PW38/E3 is the covering letter vide which he received the documents vide another letter Ex. PW38/E4. Ex. PW38/E2 bears his endorsement and signatures at point A, Ex. PW38/E5 is the carbon copy written by carbon process by him and under his signatures vide which he seized the Ambassador car no. DDB-8437 which was seized from Amar Auto Service Centre. He deposed that the said car was purchased by Chander Prakash Srivastava, Ex. PW38/E6 is another receipt memo vide which he seized certain documents mentioned therein. He deposed that a search was conducted by his colleauge the then Inspector Jai Kumar under his instructions at the residence of Chander Prakash Srivastava whose signatures and handwriting he identify. He deposed that Ex. PW38/E7 is the search list, Ex. PW38/E8 is another seizure memo vide which he seized electrostate machine from Savita Electrostate Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad on the disclosure of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava whose signatures is at point A. Ex. PW38/C4 was also executed in response to the disclosure of accused Chander Prakash and Ex. PW38/E in three sheets and Ex. PW38/E10 were seized by him. Ex. PW38/E11 and Ex. PW38/E12 were also seized in response to the disclosure made by accused C.P. Srivastava. Ex PW38/E13 is the seizure memo vide which he encashed interest warrants against UTI certificates and it bears his endorsement and signatures at point A. He further deposed that I.N. Srivastava is father in law of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava and Sh. I.N. Srivastava produced the UTI certificates along with interest which have already been marked collectively Ex. PW2/B and in response to his notice u/s 91 Cr.P.C. which was issued by him on the disclosure of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. EX. PW38/E14 is another seizure memo under his handwriting and signatures vide which he seized the documents mentioned therein relating to employment of Arvind Kumar Srivastava in Indespo International P Ltd and M/s Savita Electrostate was being run by CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 26 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. He deposed that Savita Srivastava is the w/o of accused Chander Prakash and after conclusion of investigation being satisfied he filed the challan against accused Chander Prakash Srivastava and Arvind Srivastava.
45 PW39 Inspector Jai Kumar deposed that on 11.01.1991 he was working as Inspector CBI in Special Crime Branch, Delhi and under the instructions of Sh. H.S. Rawat IO of this case, he conducted the searches at the residential premises i.e. C-233, Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad, residence of Chander Prakash Srivastava. He deposed that the search was conducted in presence of two independent witnesses and Chander Prakash Srivastava was also present at the time of search. He deposed that after conducting the searches the search memo Ex. PW38/7 was prepared which bears his signatures at point A and it bears the signatures of witnesses at point B. He further deposed that the copy of search memo was given to Chander Prakash Srivastava. The acknowledgment with regard to receipt of search memo by him at point C. He deposed that the documents recovered during the search was Ex. PW39/A1 to 19 sheets of papers. He deposed that Ex. PW35/A was also recovered during search. Ex. PW39/20 and 21 are the pass book which were also recovered during the search.
Arguments advanced and case law relied upon :
46 I have gone through the evidence led by the prosecution to prove its case as well as heard the arguments addressed by both the sides written. Written arguments is filed by defence also considered.
47 In support of its case Ld. APP for CBI has argued that present case is based upon documentary, ocular as well as circumstantial evidence. In order to prove the guilt of the accused prosecution examined as much as 39 witnesses. In view of testimony of these witnesses prosecution has proved that accused Chander Prakash Srivastava (A1) was posted in Syndicate Bank Branch at Hapur at relevant time and he was custodian of demand draft leafs. It has also come in evidence that A1 was also posted at Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank. It is further argued that it has come in the evidence that accused Chander Prakash Srivastava CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 27 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 has opened two saving bank accounts in fictitious name i.e. Ramakant Tiwari and Yogender Kumar in the branch of Canara Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi. It is also come in evidence that one demand draft leaf was missing from the Patiala Branch of which A-1 was the custodian and many other demand drafts leafs were missing from the branch of Syndicate Bank at Hapur, UP and out of missing DDs, 13 DDs were forged by accused and deposited in two fictitious accounts and encashed. It has also further argued that A1 has got issued five cheque books and he has put his signatures on the acknowledgment slip of the issuance of cheques and one cheque book was received by the brother in law of A1 and have siphoned off the amount and made heavy investment in the properties and shares. To prove the fact that both the above mentioned accounts were opened by A-1 and DDs were forged. GEQD has given its opinion as positive holding that the signatures on account opening form and the specimen card were of A-1. The signatures on the acknowledgment slip is of A-1. Not only this, it is also argued that conduct of the accused during the relevant time is also important as accused had remained on unauthorized leave during that period. It is further argued that the objection of accused that no request was made by State of UP for transfer of the investigation of CBI, hence, present court has no jurisdiction, is baseless as present RC was registered on the complaint of the Assistant General Manager of Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office, Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi as offence has committed in Delhi.
Therefore, there is no application of section 6 of Delhi Police Establishment Act, in the present case. It is further argued that in view of testimony of PWs prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and accused be convicted and sentenced as per law.
48 Per contra, Ld. Counsel for accused has argued and have also filed written submissions on behalf of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. It is argued that as no request was made either by UP Government for transfer of the investigation to the CBI, this court has no jurisdiction to try the present case and accused is entitled to be acquitted. It is further argued that A-1 and Prabhat Kumar Rastogi were joint custodian of the DDs but CBI did not investigate as to how the DDs were stolen. It is further argued that GEQD gave its opinion in respect of only 5 persons while opinion was sought in respect of 6 persons and CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 28 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 GEQD did not give any opinion regarding Chander Kumar. This fact shows that report of GEQD is not complete and cannot be relied. It is also argued that when the DD leafs were in the joint custody of A1 and Prabhat Kumar Rastogi, hence, no offence if made out u/s 409 of IPC. It is also argued that for the offence of 120B IPC, prosecution have to prove that there was agreement between two or more person but prosecution has failed to prove that who were those two persons conspired to commit the crime and lastly it is vehemently argued that in case of Jahira Abduallah vs. State of Gujarat, Hon'ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of fair trial to the accused and hold that same was centric to the administration of justice and essential protection of the human rights. He has also relied certain other judgments on this point and have further argued that there is a denial of fair trial case if Hon'ble Trial Court refused to hear material witnesses of the accused. In view of these arguments, it is prayed by the accused that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, accused is entitled to be acquitted.
BRIEF REASONS FOR MY DECISION 49 A-1 was charged u/s 420/419/409/467/468/471 IPC and A-2 was charged u/s 411 IPC for cheated Syndicate Bank to the tune of Rs. 15,97,727/-. The present case is based on the documentary as well as circumstantial evidence. Both the accused persons are also charged for conspiracy. The case of the prosecution is that 13 stolen demand drafts leafs were forged and deposited in the account no. 28458 in the name of Yogendra Kumar (fictitious person) and account no. 26543 in the name of Rama Kant Tiwari (fictitious person) in Canara Bank, Nehru Place Branch, Delhi. The address of both the fictitious persons mentioned in the account opening form as 10 and 12 C, Sector III, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. As per testimony of PW1 S.P. Singh, J.E. who was incharge of maintenance of Government quarter in the R.K. Puram Area, who have deposed that no such premises exists. It is also pertinent to mention that out of 13 DDs, one DD leaf bearing no. 156954 belongs to Patiala, Syndicate Bank and 12 DD leafs pertained to Extension Counter of Syndicate Bank, Hapur, UP.
50 In order to prove its case prosecution has examined 39 witnesses. In CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 29 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 order to prove the guilt of accused persons prosecution have to prove the following issues:-
(i) Whether accused Chander Prakash Srivastava A1 and Arvind Kumar Srivastava A2 in any way connected with account no. 26543 and 28458 in the name of fictitious person i.e. Rama Kant Tiwari and Yogendra Kumar ?
(ii) Whether account no. 26543 and 28458 in the name of Yogendra and Rama Kant were opened by accused Chandra Prakash Srivastava ?
(iii) Whether 13 DDs were deposited in these accounts and money was withdrawn/transferred by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava ?
(iv) Whether Chander Prakash Srivastava was custodian of 13 DDs and were forged by him ?
(v) Whether accused Chander Prakash Srivastava cheated the bank to the tune of Rs. 15,97,727/- ?
Issue no. i, ii and iii are interconnected and I will decide these issues simultaneously.
51 It has come on record in the deposition of PW2 Rajinder Kumar Sharma that in the year 1987 he was working as Store Officer in Exports India and Indexpo International P. Ltd. He introduced the account of Arvind Kumar Srivastava in Canara Bank of Nehru Place Branch and he identify his signatures is at point A on account opening form Ex. PW2/A. He further deposed that accused Arvind Kumar signed this account opening form at point B in his presence and his endorsement at point C in this regard is in his hand.
52 PW3 Ms. E.J. Ekka deposed that in the year 1988 while she was posted as an officer in Canara Bank of Nehru Place Branch and she had verified the signatures of A-2 Introducer of the account which are at Q-28A and her signatures is at point A on Ex. PW3/A i.e. account opening form.
53 PW7 Bishamber Dayal deposed that he verified the signatures of the introducer A2 and he signed in his presence at point Q33 B. He deposed that Ex.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 30 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 PW4/D the original ledger sheet of account of Arvind Kumar the entries therein are under his handwriting and he has initialed against the entries as supervisor. He deposed that Ex. PW6/B original ledger sheet also has been initialed by him at points A and Ex. PW7/a cash credit voucher which was received in normal official course and he released the cash credit by putting his initials at point A. Ex. PW7/2 to Ex. PW7/4 are clearing credit vouchers which were checked and released by him and the amount of this credit voucher was credited to the respective accounts.
54 PW4 V.K. Palekar deposed that in the year 1988-89 he was working as Officer in Canara Bank, Branch Nehru Place and he handed over certain documents to the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW4/A and the said memo was signed by him at point A. Ex. PW4/B is the specimen signatures card pertaining to account no. 28458 of Ex. PW4/B pertains to Ex. PW4/C account opening form. He deposed that account was allowed to be opened by Bishamber Dayal Supervisor and he identify his signatures is at point A. Sh. S.R. Shenoy was the branch Manager who allowed to open the account and his signatures are at point B. He deposed that it is maintained in the normal official course of banking business and the entry at point A in this ledger sheet is initialed by him vide which an amount of Rs. 98080/- was credited to the account of Yogender Kumar on 12.10.89 by clearing Ex. PW4/E. 55 PW5 G. Kamlakannan deposed that accused Chander Prakash whom he knew as Yoginder Kumar at that time had given the specimen writing before CBI and in his presence on Ex PW5/1 to 10 were taken. He has further stated that accused Chander Prakash used to operate saving bank account no. 28458 in Nehru Place branch of Canara Bank. He deposed that Ex. PW5/55 to 69 are the cheques which were received in Nehru Place Branch for withdrawal of the money from account no. 28458 issued by Yoginder Kumar were received in normal course of banking business and were passed by him for payment.
56 PW6 P Venogopal deposed that he has handed over documents to the CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 31 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 CBI vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/A and he has seen the original ledger sheet EX. PW6/B which was also handed over vide Ex. PW6/A. He deposed that it pertains to account no. 26543 and ledger sheet is maintained by the bank in normal course of its business. He also handed over the specimen signatures card of account no. 26543. He deposed that on 24.10.1989 vide entry no A, at page 104, a cheque book of ten leafs were issued against saving bank account no. 26543 and it was acknowledged by one Ramakant (A1) who signed against this entry which has already been marked as Q 233. He deposed that Ex PW6/I is another cheque book issue register maintained in Nehru Place Branch in normal official course vide entry at point A at page 144 a cheque book of 10 leafs were issued to the account holder of account no. 28458 who acknowledged the cheque book by signing at point already marked Q-224. He deposed that Ex. PW6/K is another cheque book vide entry mark A was issued to the account holder of account no. 28458 who acknowledged the cheque book by signing at point Q-225. Likewise, another cheque book was issued against the above account which was acknowledged by one Rajiv Srivastava by signing at point Q-226 at page no 40 of the above said. Vide same register another cheque book was issued against the same account number and account holder Yoginder Kumar himself acknowledged the cheque book by putting his signatures at point Q227 at page no. 77 of the same register. He deposed that there are 12 entries regarding the clearance of 12 DDs which are at point A1 to A12 and there is another entry at point A13 57 As I have stated above this case is based on circumstantial as well as documentary evidence. The questioned documents stated above i.e. acknowledgment of the issuance of cheque slip, specimen signatures on the account opening form of account no. 26543 and 28458 and the specimen signatures card issued sent to GEQD department for the opinion and PW32 Mohinder Singh has examined and filed his report in this case and when he appeared in the witness box, he categorically deposed that the questioned documents were in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava A-1. This witness was cross examined in detailed by the accused but his testimony remained unimpeached. Therefore, in view of testimony of PWs and in view of my CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 32 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 reasons, I hold that account no. 26543 and 28458 were opened by A-1 in the fictitious name i.e. Yogender Kumar and Ramakant Tiwari on the false address and he has deposited the forged DDs in these accounts. Not only this he has got issued the cheque books from these accounts by signing acknowledgment slip himself and one cheque book through his brother in law, Rajiv Srivastava and withdrew the amount from these accounts by signing the cheques. Therefore, issue no. 1,2, and 3 are decided in favour of the prosecution.
Whether Chander Prakash Srivastava was custodian of 13 DDs and were forged by him ?
58 PW 12 Siri Kishan Sharma deposed that during the year 1983 to 1990 he worked in Extension Counter of Syndicate Bank, Hapur and he knew accused Chander Prakash Srivastava and Chanderprakash Srivastava was the Officer Incharge of Extension Counter, Hapur. He deposed that DDs were kept in safe custody and keys of safe custody used to be with Chanderprakash and another set with the cashier. He deposed that sometimes Chanderprakash Srivastava used to attend office late since he used to come from Ghaziabad during the tenure of Extension Counter. He further deposed that sometimes Gopal Singh driver of the Chanderprakash used to visit the Extension Counter.
59 PW19 Ram Nath deposed that during the year 1987 onwards, he was the Divisional Manager of Ghaziabad Division which consisted of branches of the District including Hapur Branch and has further deposed that as per banking instructions of their bank and all the security items such as demand drafts etc. are kept under the joint custody of two persons in the safe and in Hapur Branch and its extension counter situated at SSV College premises also were doing same practice.
60 PW34 K.R. Anand deposed that he was posted as Asst. Manager in Hapur Branch of Syndicate Bank during the year 1985 to 1989 and there was and extension counter of Hapur Branch Syndicate Bank at SSV College and he worked CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 33 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 at the extension counter and he knew Chander Prakash Srivastava who worked with him at Hapur Branch as well as in extension counter and he can identify his signatures and handwriting as he has seen him writing and signing. He has further deposed that vide Ex. PW13/B, he received DD leafs mentioned therein and it bears his signatures at point A. Ex. PW9/I to VI are demand drafts with are in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava and further deposed that Ex. PW4/F, PW9/VII, PW5/77, PW5/78, PW9/VIII, and PW5/79 (forged DDs) are also in the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava.
61 PW35 Ved Prakash deposed that he was posted in the Hapur Branch of Syndicate bank from 1988 to 1995 and he knew Chander Prakash Srivastava since he was officer Incharge of Extension counter at the time of his tenure. He has further deposed that he can identify his handwriting and signatures. Sometimes Chander Prakash Srivastava used to attend office late and in that event he used to sent the keys through his brother in law. He has further deposed that Ex. PW15/A, B, C and D are the handwriting of Chander Prakash Srivastava and Ex. PW5/56, PW5/57, PW5/58, PW5/59, PW5/61, PW8/A, PW5/65, Ex. PW5/68, PW32/A2, PW32/A4, PW5/70, PW7/3, PW32/A7 are also in the handwriting of accused Chander Prakash Srivastava.
62 PW18 Jugesh Chander deposed that during year 1985 to 1992 he was posted as Manager in Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank. He further deposed that Ex. PW18/1 is the office copy of the letter sent by him to the Divisional Manager, Syndicate Bank, CAO regarding missing of one DD leaf bearing no. 156954 and this DD leaf belong to Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank which was received vide packing note Ex. PW18/2 from Syndicate Bank, Stationary records division, head office, Manipal. He further deposed that this leaf was part and parcel of DD mentioned at Sl No. C containing DD leaf bearing no. 156901 to 157000 and Ex. PW9/II is that DD leaf which was missing from their branch. He deposed that this DD leaf has been used as a demand draft purported to have been issued by Hapur Branch of the Syndicate Bank. Since, this DD leaf belonged to our branch therefore, question of issuance of any demand draft vide CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 34 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 this leaf from Hapur Branch of Syndicate Bank does not arise. He further deposed that Chander Prakash Srivastava (A1) was Incharge of DD section and as such, the DD page containing this DD leaf was entrusted to him. Ex. PW18/D to Ex. PW18/5 are certified copies of the attendance register which is maintained in the branch in the normal official course and Ex. PW10/3 bears the signatures of Chander Prakash Srivastava at point A regarding his presence in the branch on 28.03.88. This witness further deposed that vide this register it was also recorded that who were the joint custodian of the keys and on 28.03.1988 as per this register, Sh. Chander Prakash Srivastava (A1) was the Joint Custodian and the DD leafs are kept in his safe custody.
63 From the testimony of above PWs, it is crystal clear that A1 was custodian of DD leafs and as such 13 DD leafs mentioned above were forged and forged demand drafts deposited in the account no. 26543 and 28458 by A1 in Canara Bank, Nehru Place, Branch, Delhi. From the testimony of above witnesses it is clear that at the Hapur Branch and Patiala Branch of Syndicate Bank A1 was custodian of the forged DD leafs. Not only this PW32 has categorically deposed in the witness box that handwriting of questioned documents on the GEQD report are of A-1. PWs have also identified the signatures on forged DD. Therefore, in view of cumulative effect of testimony of PWs coupled with corroborative piece of evidence of GEQD, I also hold that it was accused Chander Prakash Srivastava A-1 only who has committed breach of trust by misusing the DD leafs which were entrusted to him by the bank, in a safe custody, who was custodian of leafs, being the Officer of Bank and forged the same as used as genuine knowingly that these were forged.
Whether accused Chander Prakash Srivastava cheated the bank to the tune of Rs. 15,97,727/-
64 In view of my above reasons, it has proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution that account 26543 in the name of Ramakant Tiwari (fictitious person) and account no. 28458 in the name of Yogender Kumar (fictitious person) were opened in Canara Bank, Nehru Place Branch by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. It has also proved that for opening account no. 26543 co-accused CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 35 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Arvind Kumar Srivastava (deceased) have introduced accused Chander Prakash Srivastava as Ramakant Tiwari and for opening account no. 28458, A-1 has forged the signatures of co-accused Arvind Kumar Srivastava (deceased) as introducer. It has also proved that out of 13 DDs, two DDs were deposited in account no. 26543 in the name of Ramakant Tiwari (fictitious person) and encashed to the tune of Rs. 1,29,780/- by A1 and 11 forged DDs were credited and encashed in account no. 28458 in the name of Yogender Kumar (fictitious person) to the tune of Rs. 14,67,947/- by A1. It is also proved by the prosecution that five cheque books comprising 10 leafs each were issued and out of which four acknowledgment slip in respect of four cheque books were signed by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava which are Q223, 224, 225 and Q227 and one acknowledgment slip was got issued through Rajiv Srivastava, brother in law of A-1. His signatures are Q226. Not only this those cheques were issued by A1 and money was encashed and siphoned off. To prove this fact the testimony of PW3 E.J. Ekka, PW4 V.K. Palekar officer of Canara Bank, PW5 G. Kamlakaran and PW6 P. Venugopal are very important. From the testimony of this witness coupled with the testimony of PW32, GEQD prosecution has proved that both the above mentioned accounts were operated by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava. The questioned signatures on the acknowledgment slip of issuance of cheque book i.e. Q223, Q224, Q225, Q226 and Q227 have been proved that these cheque books were received by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava and his brother in law. GEQD has given positive opinion in this regard. Evidence has come on record that he has deposited the substantial amount in GDA as flats were get allowed by him. Not only this, prosecution has also proved that substantial amount has been invested by A-1 for purchasing of UTI shares. In view of my above reasons, I am of the view that the amount credited in respect of 13 forged DDs were siphoned off/encashed by accused Chander Prakash Srivastava and have cheated the Syndicate Bank for Rs. 15,97,947/-. PW6 further deposed that he received the proceeds of 13 drafts mentioned in Ex. PW6/2 from Syndicate Bank and in case these 13 drafts are not genuine Syndicate Bank is the looser.
65 Further so far as the arguments of accused that this court has no CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 36 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 jurisdiction to try this case as investigation in view of section 6 of Delhi Police Establishment Act was not transferred at the request of State Government and to substantiate his arguments Ld. Counsel has relied upon the case law i.e. 1999 CRI.L.J. 3789 and 2005 CRI.L.J 180 66 I have gone through these judgments. These judgments are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case as in the present case, independent FIR has been registered by the CBI on the complaint of Assistant General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Bhagwan Dass Road, Delhi. In the deposition of IO, he has categorically mentioned that CBI has investigated this matter and intimation has been given to the UP police and S.P. Ghaziabad has handed over all the documents to CBI at the initial point when the matter was investigated and UP police has closed the case. I find no reasons in the arguments addressed by the accused that this court has no jurisdiction to try this case. Moreover, this court has the protection of section 462 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:
"Proceedings in wrong place- No findings, sentence or order of any Criminal Court shall be set aside merely on the ground that the inquiry, trial or other proceedings in the course of which it was arrived at or passed, took place in a wrong sessions division, district, sub-division or other local area, unless it appears that such error has in fact occasioned a failure of justice"
67 The other arguments of accused that he and Prabhat Kumar Rastogi both were joint custodian of the demand draft and demand draft were handed over to Chander Kumar whose role has not been investigated by the CBI, is also baseless. From the reason given above, this court hold that demand draft were forged by the accused Chander Prakash Srivastava, credited and encashed by depositing in the aforementioned account. Not only this prosecution has proved that the amount was withdrawn by the accused then, no question arises to investigate the role of Chander Kumar for the investigation to be conducted by the CBI. It is also pertinent to mention that role of Chander Prakash was investigated by the CBI, no evidence was found against him and his name is put in column no. 2 of the charge sheet. The other arguments raised by the accused that prosecution has not proved that who was that other persons who helped the present accused in conspiracy u/s 120 B IPC. Prosecution has categorically proved that accounts no. 26543 was opened by A1 which was introduced by CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 37 of 39 RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 Arvind Kumar Srivastava A-2 (now deceased) and A/c No. 28458 was also opened by A-1 by forging the signatures of A-2. So, this argument of accused is also baseless as conspiracy was hatched by A-1 and A2 to cheat the Syndicate Bank and have cheated Syndicate Bank for a tune of Rs. 15,97, 947/-.
68 The other arguments of the accused that he has not been given fair trial is also baseless as from the proceedings of this case, it is clear that accused was duly represented by a private counsel and witnesses have been duly cross examined. The conduct of accused during trial not remain up to the mark as in this case statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C was recorded on 20.11.2010. Thereafter, matter was being dragged on to lead defence evidence but of no avail and accused is in the habit of seeking adjournments on one or the other count. He moved an application for leading defence evidence but same was dismissed by speaking order, which is evidence from record. Accused went in revision against the order of this court. Ld. Sessions Court has also observed the conduct of accused in its order and Revisionist court has mentioned in its order dated 16.08.2014 that in the trial court accused is availing the services of legal aid counsel as he is not in a position to pay the fee but in the said court he was represented by private counsel. Not only this, Ld. PP for CBI has stated that against the order dated 16.08.2014 of dismissing the application for leading DE, accused has preferred revision before the Hon'ble High Court. CBI has also filed computer generated copy of order dated 05.09.2014 of Hon'ble High Court vide which Hon'ble High Court was pleased to dismissed the petition with a cost of Rs. 10,000/-. Therefore, in view of these reasons, this court is of the view that the arguments of accused that he has not been given fair trial is baseless as he has been given ample opportunities but of no avail. Moreover, accused by calling defence evidence from UP police wants to prove the factum of registration of FIR by UP police and also not making any request by State Government u/s 6 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. But both these facts have not been disputed by prosecution and court. Present RC was registered independently on the complaint of Assistant General Manager of Syndicate Bank, Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi.
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 38 of 39RC No. 14 (S)/90 PS:CBI/SCB/ND U/s 120B/419/420/409/467/468/471 IPC DOD: 11.09.2014 69 Therefore, in view of my above reasons, I am of the considered view that prosecution has been succeeded in proving that accused Chander Prakash Srivasatava, A-1 have entered into criminal conspiracy with A.K. Srivastava A-2, (now deceased) to cheat the Syndicate Bank by misusing the DD leafs of which A-1 was custodian and forged 13 DDs, opened two bank accounts in the name of fictitious persons and deposited /credited 13 forged DDs in those accounts and encashed them and cheated the bank to the tune of Rs. 15,97,947/-. Hence, accused Chander Prakash Srivastava is convicted for offence u/s 120B/409/419/420/467/468/471 IPC.
70 It is further clarified separate charge u/s 411 IPC was framed only against accused A.K. Srivastava (now deceased) as proceedings have been abated against him. Same has not been discussed.
Order accordingly,
Announced in the open court (Pooran Chand)
on 11.09.2014 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Central District:Tis Hazari Courts:Delhi
CBI V. Chander Prakash ("Convicted") Page 39 of 39