Bangalore District Court
Central Bureau Of Investigation vs B.Suryanarayana Hebbar on 30 September, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE IN THE COURT OF THE XLVI
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR CBI CASES (CCH-47) AT
BENGALURU
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2015.
PRESENT:
Shri K.H.MALLAPPA, B.A.,LL.B.,
XLVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge
and Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases,
Bengaluru.
SPECIAL CRIMINAL CASE No.68/2010
COMPLAINANT : Central Bureau of Investigation,
A.C.B.,Bengaluru
(By Public Prosecutor)
-VERSUS-
ACCUSED-1 : B.Suryanarayana Hebbar,
S/o.B.Sadashiva Hebbar,
Aged 60 years,
r/o.House No.142, 13th Main,
BTM 1st Stage,
Bengaluru - 560 068.
ACCUSED-2 : V.Srivatsan,
S/o.K.Venkatasubbaiah,
Aged 59 years,
House No.856-B, 10th Main,
6th Cross, Block-2,
BSK 1st Stage,
Bengaluru-50.
2 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
ACCUSED-3 : G.A.Muniraju,
S/o.Late Annayappa,
Aged 40 years,
Managing Director,
M/s.Manjunatha Land Developers
& Constructions Pvt.Ltd.,
Indiranagar,
Bengaluru-560 038.
r/o.No.39, 5th Cross,
Narasimaiah Layout,
Vijanapura,
Bengaluru-16.
ACCUSED-4 : John Moses,
S/o.P.Devamani,
Aged 42 years,
Director, M/s.Doxado
M.Technologies, Pvt.Ltd.,
No.45/2, 7th Cross, 8th Main,
Vasanth Nagar,
Bengaluru-52.
r/o.House No.7, 3rd Cross,
H.S. Layout,
Kavalbyrasandra,
R.T.Nagar,
Bengaluru-32.
ACCUSED-5 : P.Devamani,
S/o.Ponnuswamy,
Aged 65 years,
Chief Executive Officer,
M/s.Doxado M.Technologies
Pvt.Ltd., No.45/2, 7th Cross,
8th Main, Vasanth Nagar,
Bengaluru-52.
r/o.No.487, II Block, 6th Cross,
9th Main, Near KEB Office,
HBR Layout, Kalyan Nagar,
Bengaluru.
3 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
ACCUSED-6 : Miss Saroja Dotre
D/o.Rajappa Dotre,
Aged 45 years,
House No.5, 8th 'A' Main,
S.R.Nagar,
Bengaluru-27.
ACCUSED-7 : Smt.Poornima Kumar
W/o.Kumar,
Aged 34 years,
House No.15/45, I Main Road,
Maruti Extension,
Srirampura Post,
Bengaluru-21.
ACCUSED-8 : Smt.P.B.Vani,
W/o.P.C.Belliappa,
Aged 45 years,
No.27/1, 2nd Cross,
Venkataswamy Layout,
Near Nanjappa Circle,
Vidhyaranyapura,
Bengaluru.
r/o.Beeduli Village & Post,
Virajpet, South Coorg.
Karnataka.
ACCUSED-9 : Smt.Sumitra,
D/o.Murugesh @ Martin,
Aged 35 years,
House No.49,
Nandagokula Estate,
Shampura Road,
L.R.Bande Bus Stand,
Bengaluru-32.
ACCUSED-10 : R.K.Manohar
S/o.R.K.Karuppanna Swamy,
4 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
Aged 48 years,
No.7, 4th Cross, Saraswathipuram,
Ulsoor,
Bengaluru-8.
r/o.No.45/3, Kaikundra Halli,
College Road,
Bellandur Post,
Bengaluru-35.
ACCUSED-11 : P.Sasikumar,
S/o.Pasupathy,
Aged 39 years,
House No.12/1, 13th Cross,
Sadashiva Temple Road,
R.S.Pallya,
Bengaluru-84.
1. Date of Commission of : During the period
Offence from 28.4.2004 to
30.7.2007.
2. Date of Report of Offence : 31.3.2009
3. Name of the complainant : On Complaint
4. Date of recording of : 30.4.2012
Evidence
5. Date of closing Evidence : 13.10.2014
6. Offences complained of : 120-B r/w.420, 468
& 471 IPC and
Sec.13(2) r/w.13 (1)
(d) of Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988.
5 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
7. Opinion of the Judge : Accused is acquitted
u/S.235(1) Cr.P.C.
for the offence
punishable u/S.120-
B r/w.420, 468 &
471 IPC and
Sec.13(2) r/w.13 (1)
(d) of Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988.
8. State represented by : Public Prosecutor
9. Accused defended by A-1 by Sri SGS, Adv.
A-2 by Sri SGR, Adv.
A-3 by Sri RNN, Adv.
A-4 & 5 by Sri VB,
Adv.
A-6 by Sri BVN, Adv.
A-7 by Sri GRA, Adv.
A-8 by Sri BVN, Adv.
A-9 to 11 by Sri GRA,
Adv.
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed by the Complainant CBI/ACB/Bengaluru against the accused for the offences punishable u/S.120B r/w.468, 471 and 420 IPC and u/S.13(1) (d) r/w.13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that:-
6 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010The accused No.1 being public servant, working as Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru during the period from 28.4.2004 to 30.7.2007 and accused NO.2 working as Senior Manger (Advances), Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru, during the period from 25.8.2004 to 22.8.2006 had entered into criminal conspiracy with accused No.3 - G.A.Muniraju, Managing Director of M/s.Manjunatha Land Developers & Constructions Pvt.Ltd., No.849, 4th Main, 12th Cross, Indira Nagar, 1st Stage Bengaluru; accused No.4 John Moses, the Director of M/s.Doxado M.Technologies Pvt.Ltd., No.45/2, 7th Cross, 8th Main, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru, in the identification of customers for the purchase of 12 apartments and to avail housing loans from Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru and also with accused Nos.6 to 11 and agreed to do and causes to be done illegal acts of forging loan documents, making use of such documents as genuine with an intention to cheat the Bank in connection with the loan referred in the charge sheet and sanctioned loan and thereby cheated the Bank by corrupt or illegal means to obtain pecuniary advantage to themselves and corresponding loss to the Bank and thereby they have committed an offence punishable u/S.120-B, 468, 471 and 420 IPC and 7 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Sec.13(1) (d) r/w.13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. After filing charge-sheet Court took cognizance of the offences alleged against accused and all these accused appeared before the Court through their counsels and got enlarged on bail and contested the prosecution case. The provision of Section 207 of Cr.P.C. was complied by furnishing copy of charge-sheet and concerned documents to accused.
4. My learned predecessor in office, after hearing both sides and on going through the charge- sheet material, framed charge against accused for the offence punishable U/s.120(B), 468, 471 and 420 of IPC and further under section 13(1)(d) r/w.13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, wherein all the accused have not pleaded guilty and claimed to be tried. Then this Court called upon the prosecution to adduce evidence of its witnesses to prove the guilt against accused.
5. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined 23 witnesses as P.Ws.1 8 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 to 23 and got marked 267 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.267 and M.Os.1 to 4 and closed its side.
6. Thereafter, statement of the accused as required U/s.313 of Cr.P.C. recorded, wherein all the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances which goes against them. The defence of the accused is total denial of the prosecution case, they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case.
7. On behalf of the accused, DW1 was examined and got marked Exs.D1 to Ex.D16.
8. I have heard the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned Counsel for accused Nos.1 to 11 apart from perusing their written arguments.
9. The points that arise for determination in this case are as follows:-
(1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that Accused Nos.1 and 2 being public servants, conspired with accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 and sanctioned housing loans to accused Nos.6 9 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 to 11 for the pecuniary gain and caused loss to the Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, as alleged by prosecution?
(2) What Order?
10. Findings of this Court on the above points are as follows:-
Point-1: In the Negative Point-2: As per final Order.
For the following:-
REASONS
11. Point No.1:- PW1, who is Regional Manager, Canara Bank, Head Office, Bengaluru, has admitted in his cross-examination that in the year 1994, he joined Canara Bank in clerical cadre, he was promoted as an Officer in the year 1995, from 1995 to 2008, he worked in different capacities in different branches including administrative work and in credit section. In his career he has not worked under A-1. Further he admits that Indiranagar Branch is a large Branch and it was termed as very large Branch and in his career he never worked in very large Branch. Further he admits that in Indiranagar Branch three tier managerial administration was in practice as per 10 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 the circulars of the higher officials and he identified a photocopy of Circular bearing No.LDGM.3/99 dated 28.9.1999 as Ex.D1. Further, he admits that the managerial portfolio is fixed by the Chief Manager in very large Branch. In Indiranagar Branch A-1 was officiating as Chief Manager though he was Divisional Manager in cadre and A-2 was immediate Officer to A-1 and he was reporting to A-1.
12. Further PW1 admits in his cross- examination that he did not verify the individual roles of A-1, A-2 and other Officers during his inspection. Further he admits that loan proposals were processed by A-2, loan application processing includes evaluation of credit worthiness and eligibility of the proposed borrower, in the said process, collection of necessary papers and evaluate them and evaluation can be done by taking assistance of other functional Managers. Further he admits that in the loan mela organized at Bengaluru in Kanteerava Stadium, the application for housing loans in respect of this case were accepted along with salary slips with an endorsement "in principle sanction" and forwarded to Indiranagar Branch. The General Manager of Circle Officer has sanctioned the housing loans involved in this case. Further he admits that for all the housing loans, the 11 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Bank had obtained the intended flat that would be constructed in the project for which the finance was made available, there was a collateral security of the very same flat and letter evidencing deposit of title deeds had been obtained by the Bank. Likewise, one guarantee was also obtained to secure the loan. Further he admits that the title deeds of the flat on which the apartment by name "Manju Anugraha" was sought to be constructed was got verified by the panel advocate of the Bank and before disbursement of the loan amount, the title of the property was got convinced by the Branch and also the Circle Office. At that juncture, their panel advocate did not find any deficiency in the title. In other words, the loan was secured in its entirety.
13. Further PW1 admits in his cross- examination that the Project Manju Anugraha is near HAL Airport. At that juncture, there was ample demand for the residential flat and as such land value was in its peak and without obtaining the housing loan, it was practically impossible for a middle class person to own a flat. As such, there was huge competition among the Nationalized Banks to lend housing loans. The higher Officials had also fixed retail lending targets for its branches. To promote the 12 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 retail lending in full swing, a team was formed by the Circle Office, which would be usually present in loan melas. Sufficient publicity was given through print and Electronic media, the Circle Office had circulated a list of approved housing projects for which the loans could be processed which list included Manju Anugraha Project also. Further he admits that the loans involved in this case became irregular within a short span of time and they were classified as non- performing assets and necessary action under Securitisation Act was also initiated and flats were repossessed and physical possession of the flats was with the Bank. Further he admits that, soon after the Bengaluru Airport was shifted to Devanahalli, the land value in and around HAL Airport reduced considerably which affected several incomplete projects. Before disbursing the loan amount, the valuation of the land and intended flats was got done through approved valuer namely A.R.Dhanankar & R.K.Makhija & Co. Further he admits that one A.S.Patil of their Bank had inspected the Indiranagar Branch and gave a interim report to Head Office regarding the housing loan transactions involved in this case and during his inspection, he did not notice any such interim reports and compliance thereof.
13 Spl.C.C.No.68/201014. Further PW1 admits in his cross- examination that A-3 had not obtained any loan including the amenities loan for Manju Anugraha project from Canara Bank. Further he admits that individual buyers had obtained housing loans and there was no project finance for aforesaid project. Further he admits that individual buyers had entered into a sale agreement with A-3 apart from tripartite agreement. In pursuance of sale agreements, A-3 had executed registered sale deeds to the respective buyers for the similar consideration as is shown in sale agreements. Further he admits that the proposal for loan included the sale consideration, stamp duty and registration charges and Bank has financed 85% of the value indicated in loan proposal. Further he admits that at the time of loan application, he was not aware of stage of the construction, he did not verify the stage of construction from the records and he did not obtain valuation of entire project. Further he admits that the sale consideration was decided inter se between A-3 and individual buyers and Bank had no say in it. It was elicited from the mouth of this witness that he did not verify from the individual flat owners as to what exactly is the amount paid by them to A-3 and he did not verify the balance sheet of A-3 or his books of account. He did not record the 14 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 statements of A-1 or A-3 or any other Officer including sanctioning Officer of the Bank during his inspection. Further he admits that the loan proceeds were credited to the account of A-3 as per the mandate of respective individual borrowers.
15. Further PW1 admits in his cross- examination that in respect of all 12 housing loan accounts, the Branch did not have the power to sanction and Circle Office was the sanctioning authority and the Officer of the Branch has to perform different roles. Further he admits that the sanctioning authority namely General Manager takes the decision to grant or refuse a loan proposal based on the recommendation of the Branch. Further he admits that loans were sanctioned by Circle Office, as there was no infirmities per se in the loan proposals. Further he admits that Branch had obtained margin money by accepting the receipts issued by A-3 and nobody in the Bank noticed the infirmities in the documents submitted by the borrowers till the account became non-performing asset. Further he admits that the periodical inspection to the project depicted the development of the project and accordingly disbursements were made. Further he admits that general instructions manual is also deals with housing 15 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 loans, which is marked at Ex.D3. Further he admits that he did not make any personal enquiry in regard to the information found in Ex.P10 and its annexures. Further he admits that he has not stated that who are all responsible for the said loss and he has not estimated the quantum of loss attribute to each of the accused.
16. PW2 is the Chief Vigilance Officer in Canara Bank. He has admitted in his cross-examination that before lodging Ex.P24, he did not peruse the confidential records of A-1 and A-2. Further he admits that Manju Anugraha Apartments developed an approved project of the Bank and it was ready for occupation and possession of the flats also deliver to respective loanees. He did not got it estimated the asset value of the flats from an approved valuer. Further he admits that loss is estimated by him in Ex.P24 as per his own estimation based on Ex.P16. There was no valuation report appended to Ex.P16. Further he admits that he did not enquire A-1 and A-2 before lodging Ex.P24 complaint. Further he admits that he has not appended the communication received from Chairman authorizing him to lodge Ex.P24 when he filed the complaint.
16 Spl.C.C.No.68/201017. PW3 who has worked as Manager in Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru from August- 2008 to October-2009, has deposed with respect to production of loan papers pertaining to 12 loan transactions in respect of the project "Manju Anugrapaha Apartments".
18. PW4, who has worked as Assistant General Manager in Circle Office, Canara Bank from 2002 to 2006 has admitted in the cross-examination that he did not notice any inherent flaw in the proposal of the Branch, note put up by advance section of Circle Office when he recommended the sanction of loan. Further he admits that based on his recommendatory note, GM has sanctioned the loans.
19. PW5, who worked as Chief Manager in Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru from July-2007 to Jan- 2011, admitted in the cross-examination that as a Branch head, he had to discharge the duty of supervising, monitoring, controlling and administrative functions of the entire Branch including advances. He has identified copy of communication fixing the responsibilities issued in the Branch as per Exs.D4 and D5. Further he admits that the project of A-3 was 17 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 approved in the loan mela by the Circle Office in principle and flats were completely constructed and repayment of the loan installments had commenced by the time he took charge of Indiranagar Branch and there was no pending registration of any of the flats nor any pending creating of equitable mortgage.
20. Further, PW5 admits in his cross- examination that all the loan were secured loans and he did not notice any report by the regular inspectors regarding any deficiency in documentation or otherwise. Further he admits that any shortcomings or non-compliance by the subordinates during the period of outgoing Branch head need to be regularized at the instructions of the incoming Branch head. Further he admits that the proposals sent by the Branch needs to be verified and examined by the Circle Office. Further he admits that flats which were reprocessed by them under Secularization Act were sought to be sold in public auction as per provisions of the Act. Further he admits that valuation report is obtained after the accounts were classified as NPA and when he intended to proceed under Securitization Act. Further he admits that borrowers by name Dakshayini and Ramamurthy had requested the Bank to sell their flats and recover the outstanding amount even before 18 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 he took charge of the Indiranagar Branch. Further he admits that a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against him and minor penalty was imposed on him for not taking immediate steps in timely recovering the outstanding in respect of loan account of Dakshayini and Ramamurthy. He further admits that in the year 2009, to recover the loan amount, he had taken the assistance of A-3 and A-3 offered additional security in respect of the housing loans.
21. PW6, who has worked as Deputy General Manager in Circle Office, Canara Bank from December-2004 to June-2007 has admitted in his cross-examination that post sanction terms and conditions are usually adhered by the Branch in majority of the cases meticulously. Further he admits that he got inspected the Branch by another Office Smt.Aparna after the receipt of interim reports submitted by A.S.Patil and he do not know whether another report was obtained by the Bank from D.S.Kamath. He identified the photocopy, duly attested by the Bank i.e. report of Smt.Aparna - Ex.D7.
22. PW7, who worked as Senior Manager in Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru from 2007 to 2010 has 19 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 admitted in the cross-examination that he did not obtain any written communication from ICICI Bank and there was no impediment for the same.
23. PW8, who worked as Senior Manager in Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch from June-2005 to March-2010 has deposed with respect to the work of verification of the documents in respect of the loans advanced by the Branch.
24. PW8 has admitted in his cross-examination that he has nothing in writing to establish the fact of A-2 instructing him to fill up particulars of Ex.P8 and Ex.P13. Further he admits that as per Ex.P8, to open current or savings bank account, any other account holder of Bank who has not completed one year of account holder ship can introduce a new account.
25. PW9, who has worked as Assistant General Manager in Circle Office, Canara Bank, Bengaluru from May-2004 to Sept-2006, has admitted in the cross- examination that in respect of the housing loans of Saroja Dotre - A6, P.B.Vani-A8 and R.K.Manohar-A10, the Branch had sent compliance report to the Circle Office depicting the due compliance of sanction terms. Further he admits that the advance section in Circle 20 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Office did not notice any irregularity or non-eligibility criteria in recommendatory note.
26. PW10, who worked as an Officer in Kumara Park West Branch, Canara Bank during 2005-06 has deposed with respect to the housing loan mela arranged by their Bank in Kanteerava Stadium in the year 2005.
27. PW11, who worked as Manager in Vyalikaval Branch, Canara Bank, during the year 2005-06 has also deposed with regard to housing loan mela organized in the year 2005-06.
28. PW12, who was Sub-registrar in Krishnarajapuram from 2008-2010 has deposed with respect to providing certified copies of registered documents pertaining to flats and its encumbrance as per the requisition of Inspector of CBI.
29. PW13, who worked as Consultant to Manjunatha Land Developers (P) Ltd., and he was doing preparation of loan documents of the customer of the said Construction Company, has deposed that A-1 and A-2 were coming to Manjunatha Land Developers (P) Ltd., and they were assisting him in 21 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 respect of loan documents. A-8 to A-11 were visiting their Office as borrowers.
In the cross-examination he has admitted that at the time of retirement he was working as Senior Manger in DJ Halli Branch and he was familiar with housing loan transactions and in respect of the present loan transactions he has personally collected the documents pertaining to respective borrowers.
30. PW14 who was serving as a draft man in the office of BBMP, during 2008-09 has deposed with respect to the notice issued by CBI Officials to produce the approved drawings pertaining to A-3 and they have produced two revised sanctioned plan.
31. PW15, who was working as Junior Technical Assistant in the Office of Registrar of Companies at Bengaluru during 2009 has deposed with respect to the copies of Certificate of Incorporation, Memorandum of Association & Articles of Association pertaining to DOXADO Management Technologies Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru.
32. PW16, who was working as Branch Operations Manager of ICICI Bank in the year 2009 has deposed that during that time the CBI called him 22 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 and by giving Statement of Accounts of 6 account numbers, asked him to check those accounts as to whether they belong to ICICI Bank and that has to whether those Statements are correct. He verified those documents and found that among those 6 account numbers, 2 account numbers i.e. the Accounts pertaining to R.K.Manohar and Sumithra M. were not pertaining to ICICI Bank and the Statements of Accounts of remaining 4 accounts were not belonged to those accounts.
33. In the cross-examination he has admitted that he found several entries pertaining to Sumithra and Manohar in their Bank and he did not give documents pertaining to those accounts to CBI. Further it is elicited that during the course of transaction of those 6 accounts, he was not working in those Branches and he cannot say as to who has ascertained the authenticity of those accounts.
34. PW17 is an approved Valuer. He has admitted in his cross-examination that he has referred to plan dtd.13.3.2007 and that he has given report on 15.7.2007. Within 4 months, it is not possible to complete construction of 95% of building. He was required to give Valuation Report only for 3 flats and 23 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 not for entire building. He has not mentioned in his report about identification of those 3 flats. Further he has admitted that he has not given report regarding pent house and terrace and also of the remaining flats.
35. PW18 is also a Valuer-cum-Arbitrator, who has admitted in the cross-examination that he has not mentioned in his report as to what would have been the market value of the land when the project was mooted 3 years prior to his valuation. Further he admits cost of construction was not affected by the slump. And he has admitted that due to shift of Dommaluru Airport to Devanahalli in the year 2007- 08, there was slump in the value of land around HAL Airport Area. The present project in question, was also affected during that time. Further he admits that he has not taken into account the pent house situated at the building for valuation purpose.
36. PW19 who was a Valuer, has admitted in the cross-examination that Bank referred Manjunatha Builders to him for giving report and in turn, the said Builder approached him. Further he admits that the Valuation Report given by him is in respect of entire project and that it is not for single apartment. Further 24 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 he admits that he has stated before the CBI Officers as 'Cost of the flats has come down basically due to 3 reasons 1. Recession, 2. Shifting of Airport and 3. Down fall in the IT Sector. He admits that Bank has never disbelieved or found fault with his report at any time.
37. PW20 is the Examiner of Questioned Documents. He has admitted in the cross- examination that Q-454, Q-455, Q-456, Q-545, Q- 546, Q-547, Q-620, Q-621, Q-623, Q-625, Q-627, Q- 629, Q-630, Q-631, Q-632, Q-723, Q-725, Q-727, Q- 729, Q-805, Q-807, Q-809, Q-811 and Q-813 are Xerox copies and questioned signatures and seals of those documents are also Xerox copies. He has not given any opinion in respect of those documents because constructions of strokes of these photostatic reproduction of the signatures are not clear. Further he admits that he has given his opinion on the basis of that questioned signatures and standard signatures are like to like.
38. PW21, who was working as General Manger (H.R.) in Canara Bank, Head Office, Bengaluru from October-2009 to September-2012, has deposed with respect to the working of A-2 as Senior Manager, Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru and he 25 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 was the appointing authority and removing authority in respect of A-2 at that time. He has deposed that in the month of Dec-2009, CBI sent its report to the Chief Vigilance Officer of their Bank, CVO forwarded that report to him for giving sanction to prosecute A-2, he has gone through the said report of CBI along with documents and after going through the said material, he came to conclusion that there was a prima facie case against A-2 for prosecuting him. He has accorded sanction to prosecute him as per Ex.P203.
39. PW22 is the I.O., who deposed with respect to the investigation done by him and seizing of documents in his examination-in-chief. He admits in the cross-examination that for one FIR, he has filed 2 charge sheet bearing No.Spl.CC 68/2010 and Spl.CC 69/2010. He admits that there are 12 borrowers in these cases, except 4 or 5, all those borrowers were working in various departments. Further he admits that during his interrogation, all those borrowers admitted that they borrowed amount for purchasing apartments that were under construction by A-3. Further he admits that there was no impersonation in respect of those borrowers. Further he admits that Indiranagar Branch had not organized that loan mela 26 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 at its level. Further he admits that Ex.P261 of Spl.C.C.No.68/10 consists of list of names of persons, to whom spot approval of loans were made in the Hub at Pages 139 and 140. Further he admits that during his interrogation A-9 denied execution of letter dated 6.3.2006 i.e. Ex.P27 of Spl.C.C.No.69/2010. Further he admits that there was a note by A-1 in that document that A-9 had informed him telephonically to release further amount on 4.7.2006. Further he admits that A-9 denied forging of any documents by him. Further he admits that based on the information given by the borrowers in the housing loan stall, respective loan application will be sent to the concerned branches after according sanction in principle. He also admits that borrowers of these cases are defaulters and the borrowers who have repaid the loan, are not the accused in these cases.
40. PW23 is the Assistant Examiner of Questioned Document, CFSL. He has deposed in his examination-in-chief that on 13.8.2009 there Laboratory received an assembled CPU containing Hard Disk in sealed condition from Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru. After taking the Hard Disk from the CPU, he returned the CPU to the CBI Office. He has examined and analyzed the said Hard 27 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Disk by following the principles of Digital Forensics for the availability of data related to Pay Slips, Form No.16, appointment orders etc. in the names of A-6 to A-11 and A-4. He took the said data partly in hard copy and partly in CD and he identified CD shown to him as M.O.3. Further he has deposed with respect to report submitted along with CD at the Bank to CBI Office through letter to his Superior Officers/
41. DW1 has deposed in his examination-in- chief that accused No.1 was the Chief Manager and A-2 was the Senior Manager in Canara Bank, Indiranagar Branch, Bengaluru. That Branch was very large Branch. Sri AS Patil, Inspecting Officer has made routine inspection of Indiranagar Branch and submitted a Special Report pertaining to housing finance relating to Manju Anugraha Project. That report called as interim report was sent to her from Circle Office for investigating the matter. She identified the interim report as Ex.D10. After receipt of that report, she went to Indiranagar Branch, verified records, investigated the matter and submitted her report to Zonal Office as per Ex.D.11.
In the cross-examination it was elicited that all the observations made by her in Ex.D11 are noted by her and contents of that documents are true and 28 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 correct. While conducting investigation, she has enquired A-1 and A-2 also.
42. On perusal of the entire evidence of PWs.1 to 23, as well as DW1, it is evident that the loan granted to accused Nos.6 to 11 were in principle sanctioned at the Housing Loan Mela arranged by the Circle Office of the Canara Bank in December-2005 and accused Nos.1 and 2 have performed their duties as required under the Banking Regulations and no deficiency was noticed in sanctioning loan and it has been brought down in the evidence that the said loans were secured loans and they were became non- performing assets, they have initiated proceedings under Securitisation Act and possession of the said flats were taken by the Bank. When this is admitted fact, the contentions of prosecution that A-1 and A-2 conspired with A-3 in granting loans to A-6 to A-11 on the basis of inflated pay slips, Form No.16 and other document and thereby caused pecuniary loss to the Bank and they have gained pecuniary benefits from those acts holds no water at all.
43. On perusal of the entire prosecution case as deposed by PWs.1 to 23, absolutely there are no materials to show that accused Nos.1 and 2 had 29 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 criminal conspiracy with accused No.3 in order to defraud or cause pecuniary loss to the Canara Bank and for taking pecuniary benefits for them and as such I am constrained to accept arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor, though it is alleged by the prosecution that accused Nos.6 to 11 have furnished inflated salary slips, Form No.16, prosecution has not at all produced any materials to prove that what was there actual salary as per pay slips and the real amount ought to be shown in Form No.16. Unless and until actual pay slips and Form No.16 of A-6 to A- 11 are produced, it is not possible to accept that the alleged pay slips and Form No.16 furnished by A-6 to A-11 are inflated only for the purpose of securing higher loan and as such, I am unable to accept the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor and I am constrained to accept the arguments of learned Counsel for accused and accordingly I answer point No.1 in 'negative'.
44. Point No.2 :- In view of my findings on point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:-
30 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010: ORDER :
Acting U/s.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. accused Nos.1 to 11 are hereby acquitted for the offence punishable U/s.120(B) r/w. 468, 471 and 420 IPC and for the offence punishable under section 13 (1) (d) r/w.U/s.13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Accordingly bail bonds and surety bonds of accused Nos.1 to 11 stand cancelled. Seized MOs.1 to 4 are ordered to be destroyed being worthless, after appeal period is over.
(Dictated to Judgment Writer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected, signed then pronounced by me in the open court today i.e., on 30th day of September, 2015.) (K.H.MALLAPPA) XLVI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:31 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
P.W.1 Sri. G.S.Ravi Sudhakar 11-11-2011 P.W.2 K.B.Jayaprakash 7.8.2013 P.W.3 C.V.Shyamasundar 7.8.2013 P.W.4 Balakrishna Shenoy 22.8.2013 P.W.5 K.Rathinam 22.8.2013 P.W.6 S.Padmanabhan 29.11.2013 P.W.7 Joseph Mathew 29.11.2013 P.W.8 Sunil Kumar 29.11.2013 P.W.9 A.G.Gururaja Murthy 3.1.2014 P.W.10 N.Nagesh 20.1.2014 P.W.11 N.G.Purushothama Raju 20.1.2014 P.W.12 Krishna S.Naik 19.3.2014 P.W.13 K.Chandrashekar 19.3.2014 P.W.14 Mohammed Jaffer Sadiq 21.4.2014 P.W.15 C.Jayakumar 4.8.2014 P.W.16 Sathyanaren 4.8.2014 P.W.17 R.K.Makhija 4.8.2014 P.W.18 K.N.Narayana Iyengar 8.9.2014 P.W.19 A.R.Dhanankar 8.9.2014 32 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 P.W.20 A.Balasami 10.9.2014 P.W.21 Arun Kumar Nahar 12.9.2014 P.W.22 Basavaraj Magadum 12.9.2014 P.W.23 Chunduru Ishwara Sai Prasad 28.10.2014 LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED :
D.W.1 Smt.Aparna 9-3-2015 LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT :
Ex.P.1 Current account opening form Ex.P.2 Specimen signature form of G.A.Muniraju Ex.P.3 Current account opening form Ex.P.4 Statement of current account Ex.P.5 Statement of SB A/c of G.A.Muniraju. Ex.P.6 Extract of minutes of board meeting. Ex.P.7 Memorandum of articles of Association.
Ex.P.8 Housing loan title pertaining to Saroja Dhotre.
Ex.P.8(a) Loan application pertaining to Saroja Dhotre.
Ex.P.8(b) Appointment letter of Saroja Dhotre Ex.P.8(c) Form No.16 for the assessment year 2005-06, Ex.P.8(d to f) salary slips 33 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.8(g & h) Two statement of A/c of A6 in ICICI Ex.P.8(j) Account opening form Ex.P.8(k) Document pertaining to A-6 Ex.P.8(l) Sanction memorandum Ex.P.8(l-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.8(m) letter Ex.P.8(n) Signature of A2 Ex.P.8(o) Signature of sunil kumar Ex.P.8(p) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.8(q) Signature of witness Ex.P.8(r) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.8(s) Signature of witness Ex.P.8(t) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.9 Housing loan documents (separate file) Ex.P.9(a) Loan application of A-7 Ex.P.9(b to d) Three salary slips for August, Sept, October, 2005 Ex.P.9(e & f) Form No.16 for the assessment year 2005-06 Ex.P.9(g) Statement of account of A-7 Ex.P.9(h) SB A/c opening form Ex.P.9(i) memo Ex.P.9(i-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.9(j) Note Ex.P.9(k) Note put up by A-2 Ex.P.9(l) Signature of A-1 Ex.P.9(m) Loan application Ex.P.9(m-1) Handwriting of witness Ex.P.9(n & o) Residential proof Ex.P.9(p) Request letter dated 9.12.2005 Ex.P.9(p-1) Signature of witness Ex.P.9(q) Signature of witness Ex.P.9(r) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.9(s) Particulars of format Ex.P.9(t) Signature of witness Ex.P.9(u) Signature of A-2 34 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.10 Loan application form filed by A-8 Ex.P.10(a) Housing loan application form Ex.P.10(a-1) Handwriting of witness Ex.P.10(b&c) 2 Form No.16 Ex.P.10(d to 4 salary slips from August, 2005 to
g) November, 2005 Ex.P.10(h) Appointment letter Ex.P.10(j&k) Two statement of accounts Ex.P.10(l) SB A/c opening form Ex.P.10(m) memo Ex.P.10(m-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.10(n) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.10(n1) Signature of witness Ex.P.10(n2) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.10(o) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.10(p) Signature of A-1 Ex.P.10(q to Salary slips u) Ex.P.10(v) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.10(w) Signature of witness Ex.P.10(x) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.10(y) Particulars of format Ex.P.10(z) Signature of witness Ex.P.10(a1) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.11 Loan file pertaining to A-9 Ex.P.11(a) Housing loan application Ex.P.11(a-1) Handwriting of witness Ex.P.11(b) Form No.16 Ex.P.11(c to f) Four salary slips from August, 2005 to November, 2005 Ex.P.11(g & 2 statement of accounts
h) Ex.P.11(j) SB A/c opening form Ex.P.11(k) memo Ex.P.11(k-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.11(l) Recommendatory note put up by A-2 Ex.P.11(m) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.11(n) Signature of A-1 35 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.11(o) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.11(p) Signature of witness Ex.P.11(q) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.11(r) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.11(s) Signature of witness Ex.P.11(t) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.11(u) Certificate of compliance Ex.P.11(v) Signature of witness Ex.P.11(w) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.12 Loan application file Ex.P.12(a) Housing loan application Ex.P.12(a-1) Handwriting of witness Ex.P.12(b&c) Form No.16 Ex.P.12(d to Five salary slips
h) Ex.P.12(j) statement of account Ex.P.12(k) SB A/c opening form Ex.P.12(l) Letter dated 30.12.2005 Ex.P.12(m) Memo Ex.P.12(m-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.12(n) Notes Ex.P.12(o) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.12(p) Signature of A-1 Ex.P.12(q) Particulars of format Ex.P.12(r) Signature of witness Ex.P.12(s) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.12(t1) Signature of witness Ex.P.12(t2) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.12(u) Request letter of A-11 Ex.P.12(u-1) Signature of witness Ex.P.13 Loan application file Ex.P.13(a) Housing loan application Ex.P.13(a-1) Handwriting of witness Ex.P.13(b&c) Form No.16 Ex.P.13(d to Five salary slips
h) Ex.P.13(j&k) 2 statement of accounts 36 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.13(l) SB A/c opening form Ex.P.13(m) memo Ex.P.13(m-1) Signature of Ranganath Ex.P.13(n) Note Ex.P.13(n1) Signature of witness Ex.P.13(n2) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.13(o) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.13(p) Signature of A-1 Ex.P.13(q) Particulars of format Ex.P.13(r) Signature of witness Ex.P.13(s) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.14 Entire file pertaining to housing finance Ex.P.15 Entire file pertaining to certificate of Incorporation along with memorandum Ex.P.16 Investigation report Ex.P.17 Joint statement along with U.K.Vaidya Ex.P.17(a) Signature of P.W.1 Ex.P.17(b) Signature of Vaidya Ex.P.18 Another joint statement Ex.P.18(a) Signature of P.W.1 Ex.P.18(b) Signature of Vaidya Ex.P.19 Another joint statement of U.K.Vaidya and Joseph Mathew Ex.P.19(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.19(b) Signature of Vaidya Ex.P.19(c) Signature of Joseph Mathew Ex.P.20 Statement given by A2 Srivatsan Ex.P.20(a) Signature of A-2 Ex.P.21 Receipt memo Ex.P.21(a) Signature of P.W.1 Ex.P.22 Letter dated 12.1.2006 Ex.P.22(a) Signature of A2 Ex.P.22(b) Handwriting of Chief Manager Ex.P.23 Entire file pertaining to A-9 Ex.P.23(a&b) Loan application of A-9 Ex.P.23(c&d) Signature of A-2 37 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.23(e) Spot inspection report Ex.P.24 Entire file with complaint Ex.P.24(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.25 to 27 Seizure memo.
Ex.P.25(a) to Signature of witness 27(a) Ex.P.28 to 33 Sale Deed Ex.P.28(a) to Signature of witnesses 33(a) Ex.P.29(b to Specimen signature of Poornima
d) Kumar Ex.P.30(b to Specimen signature of P.B.Vani
d) Ex.P.31(b to Specimen signature of Sumithra
f) Ex.P.32(b to Specimen signature of P.Shashikumar
d) Ex.P.33(b to Specimen signature of Saroja
d) Ex.P.34 Pay-in-slip Ex.P.34(a&b) Specimen signature of G.A.Muniraju Ex.P.35 Receipt memo dated 3.11.2009 Ex.P.35(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.35(b) Specimen signature of G.A.Muniraju Ex.P.36 15 cheques Ex.P.37 Seizure memo Ex.P.37(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.37(b&c) Specimen signature of G.A.Muniraju Ex.P.38 10 cheques of Sumithra Ex.P.38(a&b) Specimen signature of G.A.Muniraju Ex.P.39 10 cheques of Sasikumar Ex.P.40 8 cheques of Poornima Kumar Ex.P.41 16 cheques of R.K.Manohar Ex.P.42 9 cheques of P.B.Vani Ex.P.43 13 cheques of Saroja Dothre Ex.P.44 Receipt memo Ex.P.45 File valuation report Ex.P.45(e) Valuation report 38 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.45(f) Signature of witness Ex.P.46 Compliance report Ex.P.47 Attendance extract Ex.P.47(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.48 Reply letter Ex.P.48(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.49 Certificate of incorporation Ex.P.50 Memorandum of association Ex.P.51 Articles of Association Ex.P.52 File pertaining to Manju Anugraha Ex.P.52(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.53 to 64 Specimen signature of D.Subramanya Hebbar Ex.P.65 to 75 Specimen writings/signature of A-1 Ex.P.76 to 87 Specimen signature of V.Srivatsa Ex.P.88 to Specimen handwriting of V.Srivatsa 102 Ex.P.103 to Specimen signature of P.Devanani 108 Ex.P.109 & Signature of A5 110 Ex.P.111 to Trust deed of the charitable trust 120 Ex.P.121 to Specimen signature of Saroja 132 Ex.P.133 to Specimen signature of Poornima 144 Kumar Ex.P.145 to Specimen signature of P.B.Vani 156 Ex.P.157 to Specimen signature of Sumithra 168 Ex.P.169 to Specimen signature of P.Shashikumar 180 Ex.P.181 to Specimen signature of G.A.Muniraju 199 Ex.P.200 GEQD report covering letter Ex.P.200(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.201 GEQD report 39 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.201(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.202 Amendment of R18 Ex.P.203 Sanction order Ex.P.203(a to Signature of witness
d) Ex.P.204 letter dated 31.12.2009 Ex.P.204(a) Signature of Bhanu Raman Ex.P.205 FIR Ex.P.205(a&b) Signature of Narasimha Kumar Ex.P.206 File of Saroja Dothre Ex.P.207 File of Poornima Kumar Ex.P.208 File of Ghanajit Sharma Ex.P.209 File of L.Ramamurthy Ex.P.210 File of P.Shashikumar Ex.P.211 File of R.K.Manohar Ex.P.212 File of B.Murali Ex.P.213 File of P.B.Vani Ex.P.214 File of Sumithra Ex.P.215 File of Dakshayini Ex.P.216 File of Brendon Mendonca Ex.P.217 File of Suhas Ratnakar Chavan Ex.P.218 File of documents (pages 1 to 213) Ex.P.219 File of documents (pages 1 to 19) Ex.P.220 & File of Manju Anugraha 221 Ex.P.222 Letter addressed to Suhas R.Chavan Ex.P.223 Letter addressed to Saroja Dothre Ex.P.224 Letter addressed to P.B.Vani Ex.P.225 Letter addressed to M.Sumithra Ex.P.226 Letter addressed to P.Shashikumar Ex.P.227 Letter addressed to R.K.Manohar Ex.P.228 Letter addressed to L.Ramamurthy Ex.P.229 Letter addressed to Dakshayini Ex.P.230 Letter addressed to Brandon Mendonca Ex.P.231 Letter addressed to B.Murali Ex.P.232 Receipt memo dated 5.6.2009 40 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.232(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.233 Letter dated 5.6.2009 Ex.P.234 Receipt memo dated 8.6.2009 Ex.P.234(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.235 Receipt memo dated 10.6.2009 Ex.P.235(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.236 Receipt memo dated 16.6.2009 Ex.P.236(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.237 Letter dated 6.7.2009 Ex.P.238 Receipt memo dated 6.7.2009 Ex.P.239 Letter dated 4.7.2009 Ex.P.240 Letter dated 10.7.2009 Ex.P.241 Letter dated 27.7.2009 Ex.P.242 Receipt memo dated 27.7.2009 Ex.P.243 Search list dated 5.8.2009 Ex.P.244 Attendance register Ex.P.245 Memorandum of Articles of Association Ex.P.246 File relating to Doxado.M.Technologies Limited Ex.P.247 Cash voucher Ex.P.248 File relating to Win Laboratories Ex.P.249 File relating to Doxado.M.Technologies Ex.P.250 File (pages 1 to 92) Ex.P.251 Sample seal letter Ex.P.252 I.D.card Ex.P.253 Receipt memo Ex.P.253(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.254 Letter dated 15.10.2009 Ex.P.255 Receipt memo dated 6.11.2009 Ex.P.256 & Letter dated 9.11.2009 257 Ex.P.258 Receipt memo dated 9.11.2009 Ex.P.259 Letter dated 5.11.2009 Ex.P.260 Receipt memo dated 10.11.2009 Ex.P.261 File relating to 36 documents dated 8.12.2014 Ex.P.262 Receipt memo dated 24.11.2009 41 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010 Ex.P.263 Forwarding letter Ex.P.264 Letter dated 13.8.2009 Ex.P.265 Annexure-A (pages 1 to 58) Ex.P.266 Report (3 pages) Ex.P.266(a) Signature of witness Ex.P.266(b) Signature of Krishna Ex.P.267 Covering letter dated 15.4.2010 LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED :
Ex.D.1 Circular dated 28.9.1999 Ex.D.2 Copy of letter dated 16.12.2005.
Ex.D.3 Manual of Instructions
Ex.D.4 Appraisal sheet for the year 2005-06
Ex.D.5 Appraisal sheet for the year 2006-07
Ex.D.6 Copy of letter dated 30.12.2005
Ex.D.7 Investigation report
Ex.D.8 Manual of Instructions on current and
savings bank accounts
Ex.D.9 Letter dated 20.9.2005
Ex.D.10 Copy of Interim Report
Ex.D.10(a) Letter dated 9.12.2009
Ex.D.11 Copy of report
Ex.D.11(a) Letter dated 16.12.2009
Ex.D.12 Letter dated 29.12.2009
Ex.D.13 Letter dated 31.12.2009
Ex.D.14 Covering letter dated 22.9.2006
Ex.D.15 Letter dated 17.11.2006
Ex.D.16 Letter dated 18.10.2008
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED :
M.O.1 & 2 Rubber stamp
M.O.3 C.D
M.O.3(a) Signature of witness
42 Spl.C.C.No.68/2010
M.O.4 Hard disk
M.O.4(a) Signature of witness
(K.H.MALLAPPA)
XLVI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Bengaluru.