Bangalore District Court
Central Bureau Of Investigation vs Sri.Jayadeva Kamath on 28 March, 2017
IN THE COURT OF THE XLVII ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE & SPECIAL JUDGE FOR
CBI CASES (CCH-48) AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 28th day of March 2017
PRESENT:
SRI.ASWATHA NARAYANA, B.Sc., LL.M.,
XLVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge
and Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases,
Bengaluru.
SPECIAL CRIMINAL CASE No.253/2004
COMPLAINANT: Central Bureau of Investigation,
Represented by the Inspector of
Police, Anti Corruption Branch,
Ganganagara,
Bengaluru.
(By Smt.K.S.Hema, Public
Prosecutor.)
-Vs-
ACCUSED-1: Sri.Jayadeva Kamath,
S/o.Late Sri.Dasappa Kamath,
Aged 52 years,
Formerly Sr.Manager,
Corporation Bank,
Rajajinagara Branch,
Presently working as
Sr.Manager, Coporation Bank,
ZO, Ernakulam, Kerala,
R/o.Mahalasa, IIIrd Cross,
Ravindra Nagara,
Shimoga.
(By Sri.R.Nagendra Naik,
Advocate.)
2 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
ACCUSED-2: Sri.Arunachala Sharma,
S/o.Sri.Ganesh Hegde,
Officer, Corporation Bank,
IAD, HO, Mangalore.
R/o.No.185, Ist Floor,
1st Stage, Ist Cross,
Gangotri Layout,
Mysuru-9.
(By Sri.R.Nagendra Naik,
Advocate.)
ACCUSED-3: Sri.L.Jayaram,
S/o.Late Sri.R.Lakshminarayana
Shastry, Aged 45 years,
Formerly Clerk,
Corporation Bank,
Sayyaji Road Branch,
Mysuru.
R/o.No.567/2,
IInd Ramchandra Agrahara,
Fort Mohalla, Mysuru-04.
(By Sri.R.Nagendra Naik,
Advocate.)
ACCUSED-4: Smt.A.C.Srivani,
W/o.Sri.L.Jayaram,
D/o.Sri.Chandrashekhara Bhat,
Aged 35 years,
Proprietor,
M/s.Ashwini Medical & General
Stores, K-17, T.R.Road, Mysuru.
R/o.No.567/2,
IInd Ramchandra Agrahara,
Fort Mohalla, Mysuru-570 004.
(By Sri.R.Nagendra Naik,
Advocate.)
3 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
ACCUSED-5: Sri.L.Narasimha Prasad,
S/o.Late Sri.R.Laxminarayana
Shastri, 46 years, Proprietor,
M/s.Chandana Agencies,
No.29, IInd Main, 6th Cross,
Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru-96.
R/o.No.29, IInd Main, 6th Cross,
Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru-96. ..... Discharged.
ACCUSED-6: Sri.P.Raja Pandian,
S/o.Sri.Ponnuswamy,
Proprietor,
M/s.Maxima Electronics,
No.M-II, 106, 74th Cross,
Shakthinagara,
New ASTC HUDCO,
Hosur-635 109.
R/o. C/o.Sri.Pugalenthi,
No.39, South Street,
Thenkarai,(Bommavechaveedu),
Periyakulam, Theni District,
Tamilnadu.
Permanent R/o.Suraikkapatty,
Ilandaikulam P.O.,
Ramanathaoyran District,
Tamilnadu.
(By Smt.K.M.Prathibha,
Advocate.)
1. Nature of Offence: Offence punishable under
Sections 120-B r/w. 420,
468, 471 and 477A of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860
and Sections 13(2) r/w.
13 (1)(d) of the Prevention
of Corruption Act, 1988.
4 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
2. Date of Commission of
Offence: 1998-2001.
3. Date of First Information
Report: 15.11.2002.
4. Date of Arrest of Accused-1 to 5: Not
the Accused-1 to 6: arrested.
Accused-6 was arrested
on 5.10.2005 & released
on 19.10.2005.
5. Period spent by the
Accused-6 in Judicial
Custody: 14 days.
6. Date of Commencement
of Evidence: 21.04.2011.
7. Date of Closure of
Evidence: 26.06.2015.
8. Date of Pronouncement
28.03.2017.
of Judgment:
9. Result of the Case : Accused-1, 2, 3, 4 and 6
are Acquitted.
(ASWATHA NARAYANA)
XLVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge
and Special Judge for CBI Cases,
Bengaluru.
-o0o-
5 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed alleging that, during the year 1998-2001 at Bengaluru, the Accused-1 to 6 entered into a Criminal Conspiracy to cheat the Corporation Bank, Rajajinagara Branch, Bengaluru (for short, 'the Bank') and that in pursuance of the said Criminal Conspiracy:
The Accused-1 to 6 forged Supply Orders, Financial Statements, Quotations, Valuation Certificate and used those documents as genuine documents, knowing fully well that those documents were forged documents, for the purpose of availing Cash Credit facility (for short, 'CC facility') and Supply Bill Discounting facility (for short, 'SBD facility') in the name of the Accused-5;
The Accused-1 and 2 being the employees of the Bank willfully and with intent to defraud the Bank falsified the Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank relating to the transactions of the Accused-5;
The Accused-1 to 6 cheated the Bank and dishonestly induced the Bank to grant CC facility to the tune of Rs.20 Lakhs and SBD facility to the tune of Rs.10 Lakhs in the name of the Accused-5;
6 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] The Accused-1, being the Manager of the Bank, by corrupt or illegal means obtained pecuniary advantage for himself and the Accused-2 to 6; and that thereby the Accused-1 to 6 committed an offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w. Sections 420, 468, 471, 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC') and Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'the PC Act').
2. After appearance of the Accused-1 to 6 before this Court, Copies of Charge Sheet and other documents relied upon by the Complainant were furnished to them. After hearing both the sides before framing Charge, on 28.03.2006, the then Presiding Officer of this Court passed an Order for framing Charge against the Accused-1 to 6 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420 r/w. 120-B, 468 r/w. 120-B of the IPC; against the Accused-1, 2, 3 and 6 for the offence punishable under Section 471 r/w. 120-B of the IPC; against the Accused-1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 477A of the IPC and against the Accused-1 for the offence punishable under Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the PC Act or alternatively, for the offence punishable under Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act.
3. Aggrieved by the said Order, the Accused-5 filed Criminal Revision Petition No.1350/2007 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. By an Order dated 7 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] 05.06.2008, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka discharged the Accused-5 from the offences alleged against him by setting aside the Order dated 28.03.2006 passed by this Court. The Complainant did not challenge the said Order passed in favour of the Accused-5.
4. On 13.07.2006, Charge framed against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 was read over and explained to them. Those Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During trial, the Complainant got examined 50 Witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.50 and got marked 413 Documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.413 on his behalf. With that evidence, the Complainant closed his side.
6. The Accused-1 to 4 and 6 were examined under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Cr.P.C.'). In their examination, the Accused-1 to 4 have submitted as 'nothing to say' for all the questions. In addition to those answers, the Accused-1 submitted that he is innocent and that he has not committed any offence; the Accused-2 submitted that except introducing the Account, he had no any case, he is innocent and that he has not committed any offence; the Accused-3 submitted that he is innocent; the Accused-4 submitted that she has not committed any offence. The Accused-1 filed his Written Statement denying the case of the Complainant. In his Examination, the Accused-6 submitted as 'I do not know' to almost all the questions, but admitted about his transactions with Tamil Nadu 8 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, Salem (for short, 'TIIC') and M/s.Maxima Electronics. Though he submitted that he would file his Written Statement, he did not file the same. The Accused-1 to 6 did not choose to adduce any oral or documentary evidence on their behalf.
7. Heard arguments of both the sides. Perused records including Written Arguments filed on behalf of the Complainant.
8. The learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the following citation:
CBI, ACB, Mumbai -Vs- Narendra Lal Jain & Others [Judgment of Supreme Court of India, dated 28.02.2014 passed in Appeal (CRL.) 517/2014].
9. Sum and substance of the principles laid down in the decision of the above citation is as follows:-
"Discharge of 2 Accused by the High Court does not affect the trial of other remaining Accused."
10. In support of his arguments, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Accused-1 to 4 has relied upon the following citations:-
1. State of Madhya Pradesh -Vs- Sheetal Sahai & Others [(2009) 8 SCC 617];
2. Parshadi Lal -Vs- State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) [2012 SCC Online Del 6426 Crl.Rev.Petn.No.424/2011];
9 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
3. International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (ARCI) & Others -Vs- Nimra Cerglass Technics Private Limited & Another [(2016)1 Supreme Court Cases 348];
4. Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati -Vs- CBI, New Delhi [(2003) 5 Supreme Court Cases 257];
5. Manoranjan Das -Vs- State of Jharkhand [(2004) 12 Supreme Court Cases 90];
6. Pawan Kumar Agarwala -Vs- General Manager-
II and Appointing Authoity, State Bank of India & Others [(2015) 15 Supreme Court Cases 184].
11. Sum and substance of the principles laid down in the decisions of the above citations are as follows:-
When a decision was taken collectively by various authorities, which were ad-idem in their view in the decision-making process, decision could be an error of judgment. When there was nothing to suggest that authorities abused their position or took decision to cause any wrongful gain to themselves or to a third party or for causing wrongful loss to the State or to provide pecuniary advantage to others without any public interest, it is held that no criminal misconduct was committed;
When an Accused is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, he cannot be convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 419 and 468 of the IPC, if there is no evidence to show that the Accused committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and he deceived any person fraudulently or dishonestly and induced that person to deliver any property to any person;
In order to bring a case for offence of cheating, it is not merely sufficient to prove that a false representation was made, but, it is further necessary to prove that the representation was false to the knowledge of the Accused and that it was made in order to deceive the Complainant;
10 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Intention of cheating at the inception of contract is necessary to attract Section 420 of the IPC;
Introducer of an Account is not responsible for a fraud committed in respect of that Account;
Imposing of punishment of dismissal from service on he allegation that delinquent influenced Branch Manager of another Bank to sanction cash credit facility without disclosing earlier loan of the borrower is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India when the Branch Manager who sanctioned cash credit facility suffered punishment withholding of just one increment.
12. Keeping in view the above principles of law, this case is dealt with.
13. On considering the rival contentions of both the parties, the Points that arise for determination in this case are as follows:-
1. Whether there is Sanction from the Competent Authority to prosecute the Accused-1 to 3 in accordance with law?
2. Whether there was Criminal Conspiracy between the Accused-1 to 6 to cheat the Bank and thereby, the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are guilty of the offence punishable under Section 120-B of the IPC, as charged?
3. Whether the Accused-1 to 4 and 6, in furtherance of the said Criminal Conspiracy, have forged the documents for the purpose of cheating the Bank and thereby, they are guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 468 r/w. 120-B of the IPC, as charged?
11 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
4. Whether the Accused-1, 2, 3 and 6, in furtherance of the said Criminal Conspiracy, fraudulently used the said forged documents as genuine documents, knowing that those documents to be forged documents and thereby, they are guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 471 r/w. 120-B of the IPC, as charged?
5. Whether the Accused-1 willfully and with an intention to defraud the Bank falsified the Books of Accounts/Records of the Bank and thereby, the Accused-1 is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 477A of the IPC, as charged?
6. Whether the Accused-1 to 4 and 6, in furtherance of the said Criminal Conspiracy, cheated the Bank and dishonestly induced the Bank to sanction CC facility and SBD facility to the Accused- 5 and thereby, the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 420 r/w. 120-B of the IPC, as charged?
7. Whether the Accused-1, by corrupt or illegal means, obtained pecuniary advantage for the Accused-5 by way of sanction of CC facility and SBD facility from the Bank and thereby, he is guilty of an offence punishable under Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, as charged?
OR ALTERNATIVELY, Whether the Accused-1, by abusing his position as Public Servant, obtained pecuniary advantage for the Accused-5 by way of sanction of CC facility and SBD facility from the Bank and thereby, he is guilty of an offence punishable under Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act, as charged?
12 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
8. What Order?
14. Findings of this Court on the above Points are as follows:-
Point-1: Affirmative, so far as the Accused-1 & 2 are concerned;
Sanction Order is not required to prosecute the Accused-3.
Point-2: Negative;
Point-3: Negative;
Point-4: Negative;
Point-5: Negative;
Point-6: Negative;
Point-7: Negative;
Point-8: See final portion of this
Judgment.
REASONS
UNDISPUTED FACTS
15. During 1998-2001, the Accused-1 was working as Branch Manager of the Bank, the Accused-2 was working as Officer in Inspection and Audit Department, Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru and the Accused-3 was working as Clerk at Corporation Bank, Sayyaji Rao Road Branch, Mysuru. The Accused-4 is the wife and the Accused-5 is the brother of the Accused-3.
13 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
16. M/s.Ashwini Medicals & General Stores situated at Thyagaraja Road, Mysuru, stands in the name of the Accused-5. The said firm had opened a Current Account at State Bank of Mysore, Krishnarajapuram Branch, Mysuru. Ex.P.359 is the Current Account Opening Form and Ex.P.351 is the Statement of Account relating to that Current Account. Ex.P.352 is the Statement of Account in respect of another Current Account maintained in the same Bank relating to M/s.Ashwini Medicals and General Stores. Now, the Accused-4 is running the business of M/s.Ashwini Medicals and General Stores.
17. The Accused-4 opened a Current Account at Corporation Bank, V.V.Mohalla Branch, Mysuru, as a Proprietrix of M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises. The Accused- 3 introduced that Account. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.20 are Account Opening Form, Specimen Signature Card, Letter of Proprietorship, Telephone Bill, Form No.60, Pay-in-Slip, Credit Slips Cheques and Letter addressed to DGM, Zonal Office, Corporation Bank, Bengaluru and Statement of Account relating to that Account.
18. The Accused-5 opened a Current Account as a Proprietor of M/s.Chandana Agencies in the Bank on 01.01.1999 with an introduction by the Accused-2. The Accused-1 permitted to open that Account. Ex.P.23, Ex.P.24, Ex.P.25 and Ex.P.26 are Account Opening Form, Specimen Signature Card, Letter of Proprietorship and Form No.60 pertaining to that Account.
14 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
19. The Accused-5 applied to the Bank for CC facility to the tune of Rs.30 Lakhs to meet the Working Capital requirement and procure stock for Pharmaceuticals Wholesale and Steel Furniture business and also SBD facility to the tune of Rs.10 Lakhs for Supply Bills Discounting on the ground that he had Supply Orders from the Health Department. The Accused-1 forwarded that loan proposal along with his recommendation to the Regional Office, Bengaluru and after obtaining necessary clarifications, AGM of Regional Office, Bengaluru, sanctioned CC facility of Rs.20 Lakhs and SBD facility of Rs.10 Lakhs on 02.01.1999. In pursuance of that sanction, the Accused-5 executed necessary loan documents. Ex.P.28 to Ex.P.37, Ex.P.40 to Ex.P.42 are those documents. He furnished Statements of Assets & Liabilities, Statement of Trading, Profit & Loss Account, Balance Sheets, Projected Balance Sheet, Chartered Accountant's Certificates, Permanent Certificate, Letter from District Health & Family Welfare Officer etc., relating to his business.
20. The Accused-6 is the Proprietor of M/s.Maxima Electronics. He acquired Plot No.8, Industrial Estate at Hosur under allotment on 14.12.1976 as per Ex.P.328- Allotment Order and through Ex.P.39-Sale Deed dated 16.07.1997 from Department of Industries and Commerce, Tamilnadu. He availed loan of Rs.1,20,000/-
from the TIIC on 09.06.1978 on the security of Plot No.8. He availed additional finance of Rs.7.44 Lakhs from the TIIC on 04.04.1991 by mortgaging Plot No.8. He also 15 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] availed loan facility to the tune of Rs.2.71 Lakhs in the month of August 1990 from Indian Overseas Bank, Hosur by creating 2nd Charge over Plot No.8. For non-payment of dues by the Accused-6, the TIIC seized the unit of M/s.Maxima Electronics and took possession of Plot No.8 on 5.5.1998. That property was brought for Sale twice, but, Sale was not successful for want of Bidders. P.W.12- Sri.P.Jayavelan, the then Assistant General Manager of the TIIC, produced relevant documents in this regard before the CBI Officer and he has narrated all these facts in his evidence. Further, for recovery of arrears of Sales Tax, Commercial Tax Department attached the properties of M/s.Maxima Electronics on 22.1.1999. By accepting all these facts, the Accused-6 wrote a Letter on 10.9.2003 to the TIIC seeking concession for One Time Settlement of all the dues. Ex.P.329 to Ex.P.343 are the concerned documents in respect of all those transactions.
21. The Accused-5 fully availed the CC facility and SBD facility from the Bank by making transactions through several firms including M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises, M/s.Mukhesh Medicals, M/s.Kandan Associates, M/s.Markline Agencies, M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited, M/s.Rajesh Pharmaceuticals, M/s.Guru Ayurvedic Agencies, M/s.Balaji Electronics, M/s.Tulasi Corporation, M/s.Swati Medicals etc. Ex.P.78 to Ex.P.316 are Cheques, DD Applications, DD Counterfoils, Transfer Debit Vouchers, Credit Challans and Debit Challans relating to those transactions.
16 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
22. On 27.02.2001, the Accused-6 filed a Complaint before the Deputy General Manager, Corporation Bank, Bengaluru, making allegations against the Accused-1 to 5. An Enquiry was ordered on that Complaint. P.W.13- Sri.K.L.Gokuldas Nayak, the then Manager of Vigilance Cell, Corporation Bank, conducted investigation and submitted his Report as per Ex.P.344. On the basis of that Report, P.W.2-Sri.Damodar Kamath, the then Deputy General Manager, Corporation Bank, Bengaluru Zone, lodged Complaint as per Ex.P.22 against all the Accused. On the basis of that Complaint and as per the Orders of Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru, P.W.50- Sri.B.Suresh Kumar, the then Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru, registered this case and filed FIR as per Ex.P.392. He seized and collected various documents from various authorities under Seizure Memos and Letters. He also recorded the Statements of several Witnesses. He collected Specimen Signatures and Writings of the Accused-5 and sent those documents along with Questioned Documents to the GEQD. P.W.49- Sri.S.C.Lohia, the then Assistant Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Hyderabad, examined those documents along with Sri.A.K.Singh and gave Report as per Ex.P.376 along with Reasons for Opinion as per Ex.P.390.
23. P.W.47-Sri.M.Raja, the then Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru, partly investigated the case by examining C.W.33-Sri.Gopalakrishna, collected documents 17 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] from the TIIC and handed over those investigation papers to P.W.50. P.W.48-Sri.Bhaskar, the then Manager of Canara Bank at Pevyakulam, assisted the Investigating Officer while conducting Search of the house of the Accused-6 and seizure of documents as per Search List- Ex.P.370.
24. After completing investigation, P.W.50 forwarded Copies of Documents and Statements of Witnesses to the Sanctioning Authority for obtaining Sanction and handed over the case file to P.W.16- Sri.K.M.Ramesh, the then Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru. P.W.16 verified the case file and filed Charge Sheet. All these facts are not under dispute.
POINT-1
25. As per Section 19(1) of the PC Act, without previous Sanction of the Competent Authority, the Court shall not take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 13 of the PC Act alleged to have been committed by a Public Servant. It is not in dispute that the Accused- 1 and 2 are Public Servants working in Corporation Bank. As such, as per Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act, previous Sanction of the Authority competent to remove the Accused-1 and 2 from their Office is necessary for prosecuting them.
26. P.W.15-Sri.Sudhakar.M.Bhat, the then Deputy General Manager, Corporation Bank, Personnel 18 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Department, Head Office, Mangaluru, has deposed that during the year 2004, he was the Disciplinary Authority competent to remove Scale-I, Scale-II and Scale-III Officers from their Office. He has further deposed that the Accused-1 was the Scale-II Officer and the Accused-2 was the Scale-I Officer at that time. He has further deposed that the CBI had forwarded Copies of FIR, Statements of Witnesses, Documents etc., with a request to accord Sanction to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 and that on perusal of all those documents and that on application of his mind carefully to all those documents, he was satisfied that the Accused-1 and 2 had created false documents, caused loss to the Bank to the tune of Rs.30 Lakhs and that it was a fit case to accord Sanction and that accordingly, on 16.08.2004, he issued Sanction Orders as per Ex.P.348 and Ex.P.349 to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 respectively. Contents of those documents show that after fully and carefully examining the materials, such as, Copies of FIR, Statements of Witnesses recorded during investigation and Documents collected during investigation and that after applying his mind, P.W.15 found a prima facie case against the Accused-1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w. 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and that accordingly, by passing a detail and well reasoned Order, he accorded Sanction to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 for those offences. As such, contents of Ex.P.348 and Ex.P.349 fully corroborate the evidence of P.W.15. He has 19 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason at all to disbelieve his evidence, which is well fortified by the contents of Ex.P.348 and Ex.P.349. Even in their Examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the Accused-1 and 2 did not dispute the said evidence of P.W.15. Thus, it is clear that the Competent Authority has issued Sanction to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 as required under Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act.
27. It is also not in dispute that the Accused-3 was also a Public Servant working in Corporation Bank. But, he was discharged from service on 16.06.2004 itself and as such, as on the date of filing of Charge Sheet i.e., on 30.11.2004 and as on the date of taking cognizance by this Court i.e., on 02.12.2004, he was not in service. Hence, Sanction is not required to prosecute the Accused- 3 for the offence punishable under Section 13 of the PC Act. In fact, there is no Charge against the Accused-3 for offence punishable under Section 13 of the PC Act.
28. So far as the IPC offences are concerned, as per Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C., without previous Sanction of the Competent Authority, the Court shall not take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed by a Public Servant while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty. The IPC offences alleged to have been committed by the Accused-1 to 3 are punishable under Section 120-B r/w. 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the IPC.
20 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
29. Ex.P.348 and Ex.P.349 show Sanction to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w. 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the IPC, which indicates grant of Sanction within the meaning of Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C., also. Though it is not specifically mentioned in Ex.P.348 and Ex.P.349 about issue of Sanction Order as per Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C., it is specifically mentioned in those Orders that the said Sanction is for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w. 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the IPC also. As the Sanctioning Authority in respect of the offences relating to the PC Act as well as the IPC is one and the same and as the Sanction Order shows issue of Sanction to the IPC offences also, merely because of non- mentioning of Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C., in the said Orders, it cannot be said that the said Sanction is not in respect of the IPC offences as required under Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C. The Accused-1 and 2 have not disputed this fact.
30. As observed above, the Accused-3 was not in service at the time of filing of Charge Sheet and taking of cognizance by this Court and hence, Sanction is not taken under Section 19 of the PC Act to prosecute him for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) of the PC Act. Acts of commissions or omissions alleged to have been done by the Accused-3 relating to the offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w. 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the IPC have no connection with the discharge of official duties by the Accused-3 and those acts are totally alien to 21 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] discharge of his official duties. As such, Sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C., is not necessary to prosecute the Accused-3 for those offences. The Accused-3 has also not disputed this fact.
31. For all the above reasons, it is clear that there is valid Sanction to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2 and Sanction is not required to prosecute the Accused-3 for the offences alleged against them. Accordingly, Point-1 is answered as "Affirmative so far as the Accused-1 & 2 are concerned and Sanction Order is required to prosecute the Accused-3".
POINTS-2 TO 7
32. As all these Points are interlinked to each other, in order to avoid repetition of facts, evidence and contentions, it is just, proper and convenient to determine all these Points by considering together. On considering the rival contentions of both the parties and the questions involved in this dispute, it appears just, proper and convenient to determine these Points under the following Heads:
1. Forgery & Using of Forged Documents as Genuine Documents:
Financial Statements; Valuation Certificate; Supply Orders;
Quotations;
Supply Bill;
Conclusion.
22 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
2. Cheating by the Accused-6;
3. Cheating by the Accused-3 & 4;
4. Cheating by the Accused-2;
5. Cheating & Criminal Misconduct by the Accused-1;
6. Falsification of Books of Accounts and Records;
7. Criminal Conspiracy;
8. Conclusion.
1. Forgery & Using Of Forged Documents As Genuine Documents
33. According to the Complainant, the Accused-1 to 6 committed forgery for the purpose of cheating the Bank by fabricating false Financial Statements for the years ending 31.03.1997 and 31.03.1998 as per Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.52 and Ex.P.53, Valuation Certificate as per Ex.P.51, Supply Orders dated 29.10.1998, 05.12.1998 and 28.12.1998 as per Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 and Quotations as per Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70. In order to substantiate the said charge, the learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the evidence of P.W.3, P.W.26, P.W.28, P.W.31, P.W.34, P.W.36, P.W.41, P.W.44, P.W.46 and P.W.49.
34. P.W.3-Sri.Govardhan Mallya succeeded to the Accused-1 as Senior Manager of the Bank and he worked in that capacity from 25.05.2000 to April 2004. In his evidence, P.W.3 has stated that along with Application seeking CC facility and SBD facility as per Ex.P.30, the 23 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Accused-5 submitted Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.51 to Ex.P.53, Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63, Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70. Except saying so, he did not state anything against the Accused-1 to 6 about forgery of those documents. As such, except regarding production of those documents by the Accused- 5, the evidence of P.W.3 is of no assistance about charge of forgery.
35. The evidence of P.W.49, who is the Hand Writing Expert, shows that he compared Ex.P.377 to Ex.P.379, which contain Questioned Writings and Signatures of the Accused-5 as per Q.1 to Q.4, with Ex.P.380 to Ex.P.389, which contain Specimen Writings and Signatures of the Accused-5, and that after examination of all those documents, he gave Report as per Ex.P.376 along with reasons as per Ex.P.390 in respect of those documents. But, it is not his evidence that he examined Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.51 to Ex.P.53, Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63, Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70. His evidence does not throw any light in respect of forgery of these documents. Hence, his evidence is also of no assistance about the charge of forgery regarding Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.51 to Ex.P.53, Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70.
a) Financial Statements:
36. Ex.P.46, Ex.P.47, Ex.P.48, Ex.P.52 and Ex.P.53 are Trading, Profit and Loss Account Statements, Balance Sheet and Capitalization Certificate for the period ending 31.03.1997 and 31.3.1998 relating to M/s.Chandana 24 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Agencies purported to have been issued by M/s.D.C.Srihari and Company, Chartered Accountants, Bengaluru. P.W.26-Sri.D.C.Srihari is the Proprietor of the said Chartered Accountants Company. He has deposed that M/s.Chandana Agencies had come to his Office on 2 or 3 occasions for getting prepared Balance Sheet relating to that establishment and that he told to bring Bank Passbook, Statement of Account, Sales Tax Returns and such other documents and that thereafter, the said firm did not come to him at all. He has further deposed that Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48 and Ex.P.52 are on the old Letter Head of his establishment, he has changed pattern of his Letter Head in the year 1997 or 1998 and that those documents are not prepared by him. He has further deposed that signatures found in those documents are not his signatures and that his Office Seal is not found in those documents. He has specifically stated that he has not issued those documents to M/s.Chandana Agencies. In his Cross-examination, P.W.26 has denied that he prepared the Balance Sheets of Chandana Agencies and that he is deposing falsely before the Court. This witness has stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence. The said evidence of P.W.26 shows that he did not issue Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48 and Ex.P.52, which are purported to have been issued by him in the name of his firm. Though P.W.26 has not stated specifically about Ex.P.53, which also purported to have been issued by him in the name of his firm, his evidence shows that he had no occasion to issue any 25 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] financial documents in the name of M/s.Chandana Agencies. As such, it has to be inferred that P.W.26 did not issue Ex.P.53 also in the name of M/s.Chandana Agencies. Hence, it is clear that Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.52 and Ex.P.53 are false documents.
37. However, there is nothing in the evidence of P.W.26 to show as to who created those documents. There is also no other evidence on behalf of the Complainant to show as to who actually created all those documents. As observed above, as per the evidence of P.W.3, the Accused-5 produced those documents to the Bank for the purpose of availing credit facility. As such, the Accused-5 is the proper person to speak about creation of those documents. But, as observed above, he has been discharged from all the charges including the charge of forgery leveled against him by virtue of an Order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. It is not in dispute that he is dead now. As such, his evidence is not available now. Thus, there is no evidence at all to show as to who actually created all those false documents. So also, there is no iota of evidence at all against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 to show that they are responsible in any manner for creation of all those false documents or they participated in any manner in creating those documents. Hence, it is not fit to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 have created false documents as per Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.52 and Ex.P.53.
26 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
b) Valuation Certificate:
38. Ex.P.51 is Xerox Copy of a Valuation Certificate purported to have been issued by Sri.M.Venkata Swamy, Licensed Building Surveyor and Approved Planner, Hosur, relating to Plot No.8 belonging to the Accused-6. P.W.34 is Sri.Venkata Swamy, Consulting Engineer of Hosur. He has deposed that he is the Consulting Engineer and Contractor and that he used to prepare building plans and estimates and that he also supervise construction of buildings since 1994. He has specifically stated that he is not in the habit of issuing Valuation Report and that he has not issued Ex.P.51. He has further deposed that signature found on that document is not his signature and that he does not know as to who issued that document.
In his Cross-examination, P.W.34 has denied that he himself issued Ex.P.51 and that he is deposing falsely before the Court. This witness has stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence. The said evidence of P.W.34 shows that Ex.P.51, which is purported to have been issued by him, is not actually issued by him. Hence, it is clear that Ex.P.51 is a false document. But, there is nothing on behalf of the Complainant to show as to who actually prepared Ex.P.51. It is the contention of the Accused-6 that he is not responsible for forgery of Ex.P.51 and that he did not produce that document in the Bank. As observed above, as per the evidence of P.W.3, the Accused-5 has produced that document in the Bank for availing credit facility. As such, the Accused-5 is a proper person to speak about 27 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] that document. But, his evidence is not available. There is no material to rebut the contention of the Accused-6. Absolutely, there is nothing on behalf of the Complainant to show that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 have created Ex.P.51 or they have participated in any manner in creation of that document. Hence, it is not fit to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 have created Ex.P.51.
c) Supply Orders:
39. Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.62 are the Xerox Copies of Supply Orders dated 29.10.1998 and 05.12.1998 purported to have been issued by District Health and Family Health Officer, Mysuru, in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies for supply of Drugs and Chemicals. Ex.P.63 is also a Xerox Copy of Supply Order dated 28.12.1998 purported to have been issued by Additional Director (Projects) and E/O Additional Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Population Project-IX(K), Bengaluru, in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies for supply of Gynaec Tables. It is not in dispute that these documents are produced by the Accused-5 for availing credit facility from the Bank. In all these documents, the Accused-1 has made Endorsements as per Ex.P.61(a), Ex.P.62(a) and Ex.P.63(a) as 'Original Seen' by putting his signature and Office Seal. P.W.3 has deposed about the said Endorsements made by the Accused-1.
28 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
40. P.W.36-Dr.D.M.Koradanya Mutt was the Assistant Training Officer in the India Population Project-9 (Karnataka), Bengaluru, from August 1997 to December 2001. He has deposed that, during his tenure, he was looking after the Procurement Section and that he attended almost all the meetings of the Steering Committee, which was being held periodically, and that during those meetings, discussion about procurement of Gynaec Tables from M/s.Chandana Agencies did not surface. He has deposed that signature found as that of the Additional Director (Projects) on Ex.P.360-Xerox Copy of Supply Order is not the signature of Additional Director (Project)-Sri.Vishwanath. This evidence of P.W.36 does not in any way show that Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 are false documents and that they have been prepared by the Accused-1 to 4 and 6. Though P.W.36 has stated that Ex.P.360 does not contain the signature of the then Additional Director of his Department, that document is nothing to do with Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63. As such, the evidence of P.W.36 and Ex.P.360 are of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention about forgery of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63.
41. P.W.46-Sri.K.P.Ganapathi was working as Office Superintendent in the District Health and Family Welfare Office at Mysuru from 1997 to 2005. He has deposed that he was in-charge of Establishment and Supplies of Drugs and Medicine and that Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh was the D.H.O., at that particular point of time and that he can identify the 29 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Hand-Writing and Signature of Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh. He has further deposed that Order for supply of Drugs and Medicine as per Ex.P.62 was not placed by his Office, Signature appearing in Ex.P.62 is not the signature of Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh and that File No.SUP75/98-99 dated 5.12.1998, referred to in Ex.P.62, was not in existence in his Office and that he has stated these facts before the CBI Officers during investigation. In his Cross- examination, though he has stated that he has no personal knowledge about M/s.Chandana Agencies, his evidence, that his Office did not place Supply Order as per Ex.P.62 and that Ex.P.62 does not contain the signature of the then D.H.O., remained undisturbed. There is no reason to disbelieve the said evidence of P.W.46. As Ex.P.62 is purported to have been issued by the District Health and Family Welfare Officer, Mysuru and as the evidence of P.W.46 shows that his Office did not issue Ex.P.62, it is clear that Ex.P.62 is a false document.
42. But, there is nothing to show in the evidence of P.W.46 that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are responsible for creation of Ex.P.62. As such, though the evidence of P.W.46 shows that Ex.P.62 is a false document, his evidence is of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention that the Accusesd-1 to 4 and 6 have forged that document. This witness has not stated anything in respect of Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.63, much less about forgery of those documents by the Accused-1 to 4 and 6. As such, his evidence is also of no assistance to 30 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] the Complainant to substantiate his contention about forgery of Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.63.
43. As observed above, P.W.13 conducted Internal Investigation and submitted his Report as per Ex.P.344. He has deposed that in pursuance of his Letter, District Health and Family Welfare Department, Mysuru District, Mysuru, wrote a Letter on 10.12.2001 as per Ex.P.345. Contents of Ex.P.345 show that District Health and Family Welfare Office, Mysuru, did not place any Supply Orders as shown in Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.62. This witness has stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence. As per the said evidence of P.W.13, his observations in Ex.P.344 and contents of Ex.P.345 show that Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.62 are false documents. However, the evidence of P.W.13 is of no assistance to show that Ex.P.63 is a false document. In fact, no other witness has stated about Forgery of Ex.P.63. The evidence of P.W.13 and contents of Ex.P.344 and Ex.P.345 also do not throw any light about the allegations made against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 regarding Forgery of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63.
44. It is the argument of the learned Public Prosecutor that as Health Department did not place any orders as per Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63, as originals of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 are not available and that as the Accused-1 has made Endorsements on Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 as 'Original Seen', it is clear that the Accused-1 is involved in creation 31 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63. Though the evidence on record indicates that Ex.P.62 is a false document, there is nothing to show that Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.63 are also false documents. There is also nothing to show that the Health Department did not place Supply Orders as per Ex.P.61 and Ex.P.63. As observed above, Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 are Xerox Copies. To take a Xerox Copy, there must be original. As Xerox Copy is prepared, it is clear that on the basis of its original document, it has been prepared. The Endorsement of the Accused-1 on Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 also indicates that there were original documents relating to Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63. There is nothing to show that the Accused-1 was knowing or had reason to believe that originals of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63 were forged are false documents, while making endorsements on Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63. There is nothing to show that the Accused-1 participated in preparation of those original documents or Xerox Copies of those documents. There is also nothing to show that even without the existence of originals of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63, the Accused-1 made such Endorsements. Under all these circumstances, it is not possible to accept the bare argument of the learned Public Prosecutor that the Accused-1 is involved in forgery of Ex.P.61 to Ex.P.63.
d) Quotations:
45. Ex.P.69 is a Quotation purported to have been issued by the Proprietor of Southern Machine Tools on 10.12.1998 in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies regarding
32 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] supply of Gynaec Table, Foot Step, Double Step etc. P.W.28-Sri.R.S.Murthy is the Proprietor of M/s.Southern Machine Tools. It is his evidence that his firm is not engaged in fabrication of Sheet Metal nor supply to the Health Department of Government of Karnataka. It is also his evidence that M/s.Chandana Agencies was not his customer and that he does not know M/s.Chandana Agencies or any person connected to it. He has further deposed that Ex.P.69 is on the Letter Head of his Establishment, contents of that document are not prepared in his Establishment, Signature found in that document is not his signature and that he cannot say as to who prepared the contents of Ex.P.69. It is his evidence that Mr.Ramanath was his Accountant and that he left the job in the year 2005 or so. In his Cross- examination, he has stated that on enquiry with his another employee-Mr.Venkatesh, he came to know that Mr.Ramanath had taken away a blank Letter Head from the Establishment and that on questioning Mr.Ramanath, he accepted the same. He has stated that he has no business transactions with M/s.Chandana Agencies. But, he has denied that he himself had issued Ex.P.69 and that he is deposing falsely. This witness has stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence, which shows that he did not issue Ex.P.69. On considering the said evidence, it is clear that Ex.P.69 is a false document. However, it is not his evidence that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are responsible for creation of that document or they are involved in creation 33 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] of that document. As per his evidence, his Ex-employee- Sri.Ramanath may be knowing about creation of that document or there may be his involvement in creation of that document. As such, the evidence of Mr.Ramanath is material to this case. But, the Complainant did not produce the evidence of that witness. As that document is in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies belonging to the Accused-5 and as the Accused-5 produced that document in the Bank for availing credit facility, he is the proper person to explain as to who prepared that document. But, his evidence is not available. However, there is nothing to show against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 about their involvement in creation of Ex.P.69. Hence, the evidence of P.W.28 is of no assistance to the Complainant to prove the charge against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 regarding Ex.P.69.
46. Ex.P.70 is Xerox Copy of Quotation dated 10.12.1998 said to have been issued by M/s.Sri Saraswathi Medicals in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies regarding supply of Medicine. P.W.31-Sri.K.Suresh is running a Medical Store in the name-M/s.New Saraswathi Medicals. He has deposed that his wife is also running a Medical Shop under the name and style-M/s.Saraswathi Medicals in front of J.S.S. Hospital at Mysuru. He has further stated that he did not issue any Quotation as per Ex.P.70 to M/s.Chandana Agencies. He has specifically stated that signature found in Ex.P.70 is neither his signature nor the signature of his wife. In his Cross-
34 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] examination, he has denied that Ex.P.70 is on the Letter Head of his Establishment and that he is deposing falsely against the Accused-5. This witness has stood well in the test of Cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence. As per the said evidence of P.W.31, it is clear that he or his wife did not issue Ex.P.70. As Ex.P.70 is purported to have been issued by M/s.Saraswathi Medicals, which is run by P.W.31 and his wife, and as the evidence on record shows that they have not issued such Quotation, it is clear that Ex.P.70 is a false document. But, there is nothing to show that who created that document. As that document is in favour of M/s.Chandana Agencies belonging to the Accused-5 and as the Accused-5 produced that document in the Bank for availing credit facility, he is the proper person to explain as to who prepared that document. But, his evidence is not available. There is nothing in the evidence of P.W.31 or any other witness to indicate that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are involved in any manner in preparing Ex.P.70. Hence, the evidence of P.W.31 is also of no assistance to the Complainant to prove the charge against the Accused- 1 to 4 and 6 regarding Ex.P.70.
e) Supply Bill:
47. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that Supply Bill-Ex.P.368 is also a forged document prepared by the Accused-1 and 5. In support of her contention, the learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the evidence of P.W.46 and P.W.49.
35 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
48. Ex.P.368 is a Cash/Credit Bill dated 30.01.1999 said to have been prepared by M/s.Chandana Agencies in favour of the District Health and Family Welfare Office, Mysuru District, Mysuru, regarding supply of Medicine worth of Rs.17,38,000/-. P.W.49 has examined Ex.P.368 by comparing with the Specimen Signatures of the Accused-5. For such examination, he has given marking as 'Q-2' to the Disputed Writings made in Ex.P.368. His Report is Ex.P.376. In that Report, it is not stated that the said Disputed Hand Writing is that of the Accused-1 or the Accused-5. On the other hand, in Para-3 of Ex.P.376, P.W.49 has stated that it was not possible for him to express any opinion on the Writings marked as 'Q-2' on the basis of material on hand. As such, as per Ex.P.376, P.W.49 could not give any opinion in respect of Ex.P.368.
In his evidence also, P.W.49 has not stated about his opinion regarding 'Q-2'. Hence, the evidence of P.W.49 and Ex.P.376 are of no assistance to the learned Public Prosecutor to substantiate her contention.
49. In his evidence, P.W.46 has stated that his Office has not received any Medicine or Drugs mentioned in Ex.P.368 and that the Signature on the Reverse Page of Ex.P.368 is not the Signature of DHO-Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh and that his Office has not made any payment on Ex.P.368 to M/s.Chandana Agencies or to Corporation Bank. The Endorsement on the Reverse Page of Ex.P.368 is about receiving of Stocks in good condition by District Health and Family Welfare Officer. By virtue of those 36 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] contents, the evidence of District Health and Family Welfare Officer, i.e., Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh is very important to know about receipt of Stocks and also to ascertain as to whether he has signed on Ex.P.368 or not. In his Cross- examination, P.W.46 has stated that Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh is alive. But, the Complainant did not produce the evidence of Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh. There is no explanation from the Complainant in this regard. As the evidence of Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh is very material and as he is not examined by the Complainant, an adverse inference has to be drawn against the Complainant. However, the contents on the Reverse Page of Ex.P.368 are not purported to have been made by Dr.C.G.Jagadeesh.
50. In his evidence, P.W.46 has stated that, when the Office receives Medicine or Drugs from the Supplier, Store Officer will issue a Certificate by mentioning on the Bill. As such, the evidence of Store Officer is also material to ascertain about receipt or otherwise of Drugs and Medicine as shown in Ex.P.368. But, the Complainant did not produce such evidence. In the absence of such evidence, only on the basis of Statement of P.W.46, it is not possible to conclude that Medicine or Drugs were not supplied as per Ex.P.368 and that as such, Ex.P.368 is a false document.
51. As observed above, the evidence of P.W.46 and P.W.49 is of no assistance to show that Ex.P.368 is a false document. There is no other evidence also to show that Ex.P.368 is a false document. Even for a moment, if it is 37 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] accepted that Ex.P.368 is a false document, there is nothing to show that as to who actually prepared that document. As the Accused-5 has produced that document for availing Credit Facility from the Bank, he is answerable in this regard. But, his evidence is not available. Though the Accused-1 disbursed the Credit Facility to the Accused-5 on the basis of Ex.P.368, there is nothing to show that he participated in any manner to create that document.
52. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that as per the evidence of P.W.41 and P.W.44, it is clear that the Accused-1 and 5 have committed Forgery of Ex.P.368. P.W.44-Sri.Vishwanath Kini, the then Clerk of the Bank, has deposed that he made entries in Outward Bill Collection Register about receipt of documents from the Credit Officer-Sri.Vaidyanathan and handing over the documents to P.W.41 for forwarding the same to the Dispatch Section. The evidence of P.W.41-Smt.Suman S.Bhat, the then Special Assistant of the Bank, fortifies the evidence of P.W.44. Ex.P.367 is the Extract of Outward Bill Collection Register and Relevant Entry about the evidence of P.W.41 and P.W.44 is Ex.P.367(a). The evidence of P.W.41 and P.W.44 as well as the Entries in Ex.P.367(a) show that original of Ex.P.368 was produced by the Accused-5 to the Bank, and that after process, it was sent to the Despatch Section for sending the same to the Health Department. This evidence indicates about the existence of original of Ex.P.368. The said evidence does not in any way show that the Accused-1 forged or 38 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] participated in any manner in the creation of Ex.P.368. As such, the said evidence of P.W.41 and P.W.44 does not in any way support the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor. Hence, it is not possible to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-1 forged Ex.P.368.
f) Conclusion:
53. From the discussion made above on the available evidence on record, though there is nothing to show that Ex.P.63, Ex.P.68 and Ex.P.368 are false documents, it is clear that Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.51 to Ex.P.53, Ex.P.61, Ex.P.62, Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70 are false documents. As those documents are produced for availing Credit Facility from the Bank, it is clear that those documents are forged for the purpose of cheating the Bank. But, there is no evidence to show that the Accused- 1 to 4 and 6 committed the said Forgery. As observed above, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has discharged the Accused-5 for the offence of Forgery and using of forged documents as genuine documents. There is also nothing to show that the Accused-2, 3 and 6 used those forged documents as genuine documents. Though the Accused-1 has acted upon those documents, there is nothing to show that he used those documents knowing fully well or had reason to believe that those documents were forged documents. For all these reasons, it is clear that the Complainant has failed to prove that the Accused- 1 to 4 and 6 have forged the documents and that they
39 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] used those documents as genuine documents knowing or having reason to believe that those documents are forged documents.
2. Cheating By The Accused-6
54. As observed above, for the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank, the Accused-6 is shown as Guarantor. P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.8, P.W.13, P.W.38 and P.W.43 have deposed that the Accused-6 is the Guarantor to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank. Ex.P.28 to Ex.P.31, which are Loan Application, Appraisal Reports and Sanction Order show that the Accused-6 is the Guarantor to the said Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank.
55. P.W.43-Sri.K.N.Vaidyanathan, the then Clerk of the Bank, has deposed that as per the instructions of the Accused-1, he prepared Loan Documents and that at the time when the loan documents were executed, the Accused-1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 were present. He has further deposed that Ex.P.35-Common Deed of Hypothecation, Ex.P.36-Guarantee Agreement, Ex.P.37-Arbitration Agreement, Ex.P.38-Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds and Ex.P.44-Statement of Assets and Liabilities of the Accused-6 bear the signatures of the Accused-6. He has identified Ex.P.35(a), Ex.P.38(a) and Ex.P.44(a) as the signatures of the Accused-6 in the Deed of Hypothecation, Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds and Statement of Assets and Liabilities. He has also 40 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] deposed that Ex.P.39 is the Original Sale Deed dated 18.7.1977 deposited along with Ex.P.38. Contents of all those documents clearly show that the Accused-6 stood as Guarantor to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank and that he created an Equitable Mortgage over Plot No.8 in favour of the Bank by way of Deposit of Title Deeds.
56. In his Examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., except contending that Ex.P.44(a) is not his signature, the Accused-6 did not dispute the evidence regarding execution of documents in favour of the Bank as Guarantor to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Accused- 6 has contended that Ex.P.44 is not executed by the Accused-6. In support of his arguments, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Accused-6 has relied upon the Statement of P.W.3 at Para-9 of his deposition. P.W.3 has stated that Ex.P.39 contains the signature of the Accused-6 as per Ex.P.39(a) and that it differs from Ex.P.44(a). On examination of Ex.P.39(a), Ex.P.44(a) and other admitted signatures of the Accused-6 available in record, it is clear for bare eyes that Ex.P.44(a) totally differs from that of Ex.P.39(a) and other admitted signatures of the Accused-6. This fact corroborates the version of P.W.3, which supports the contention of the Accused-6. Though P.W.43 has stated that Ex.P.44(a) is the signature of the Accused-6, it is not his specific evidence that the Accused-6 executed that document in 41 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] his presence. It is pertinent to observe here that P.W.3 has specifically stated that along with Loan Application- Ex.P.28, the Accused-5 submitted Ex.P.44. As Ex.P.44 is submitted by the Accused-5 along with Loan Application, it is clear that Ex.P.44 was not executed, when the Loan documents were executed, as the Loan documents were executed after the sanction of Loan. This circumstance indicates that Ex.P.44 was not executed in the presence of P.W.43. As such and as it is not the specific evidence of P.W.43 that Ex.P.44 was executed in his presence and as Ex.P.44(a) do not tally with other admitted signatures of the Accused-6, it is not fit to accept the bare statement of P.W.43 that Ex.P.44(a) is the signature of the Accused-6. Hence, there is force in the contention of the Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Accused-6 that Ex.P.44(a) is not executed by the Accused-6 and as such, it is fit to accept the said contention.
57. Though the Accused-6 has contended that he signed on the Blank Paper, it is not his contention that he did not execute the documents as a Guarantor to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank. As observed above, the Accused-6 lodged a Complaint against the Accused-1 to 5 on 27.2.2001. Though that Complaint is not produced, P.W.13 has reproduced contents of that Complaint in Ex.P.344. In fact, during the course of arguments, the learned Counsel for the Accused-6 has produced a Copy of that Complaint. In that Complaint, the Accused-6 has admitted about 42 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] execution of the documents on 6.1.1999 in the presence of the Accused-1 to 3 and 5 and also P.W.43 as Guarantor to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank. The Accused-6 is not an ordinary Lay-man. On the other hand, his Letter-Ex.P.372 shows that he is a B.E., Graduate. He was running an Industry and he has made several transactions. As such, it is impossible to believe that he signed on the Blank Papers. On the other hand, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also status of the Accused-6 as well as contents of his Complaint, it can be safely inferred that by knowing fully well of the contents and consequences of the documents, the Accused-6 has executed the same. Thus, it is clear that the Accused-6 stood as Guarantor and created an Equitable Mortgage over Plot No.8 in favour of the Bank as security to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 from the Bank.
58. It is the contention of the Complainant that without disclosing the previous transactions and liabilities in respect of Plot No.8, the Accused-6 has cheated the Bank while offering his property as security. In support of the said contention, the learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the evidence of P.W.8. P.W.10, P.W.12, P.W.13, P.W.38, P.W.43 and P.W.45.
59. P.W.12 has deposed about prior mortgage of Plot No.8 by the Accused-6 in favour of the TIIC. P.W.8- Sri.T.L.Ramanna, the then Clerk of ARM Branch of Corporation Bank, Bengaluru, had been to the house and 43 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] property of the Accused-6 at Hosur for an enquiry as per the instructions of Zonal Office after the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-6 became NPA. As per his evidence, during that enquiry, he came to know about prior mortgage of Plot No.8 by the Accused-6 in favour of the TIIC and he obtained Encumbrance Certificates as per Ex.P.323 and Ex.P.324 in respect of that property by paying Fee as per Receipts-Ex.P.325 and Ex.P.326. This witness was not present or he did not participate in any of the proceedings at the time when the Accused-6 offered his property as security in favour of the Bank. His evidence does not show in any manner that the Accused-6 suppressed about prior mortgage in favour of the TIIC as contented by the Complainant. Ex.P.323 and Ex.P.324, though obtained in the year 2001, do not show anything about prior mortgage in favour of the TIIC. As such, those documents are of no assistance to the Complainant. So also, P.W.13 came to know, during his Internal Investigation, about prior mortgage of Plot No.8 in favour of the TIIC. He was also not present or participated in any of the proceedings at the time when the Accused-6 offered his property as security in favour of the Bank. His evidence also does not in any way assist the Complainant to show that the Accused-6 suppressed prior mortgage in favour of the TIIC, when he offered his property as security in favour of the Bank.
60. P.W.10-Sri.S.Ganesh Shenoy is a Panel Advocate of the Bank. He has given his Legal Opinion in respect of Plot No.8 belonging to the Accused-6 after 44 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] receiving the documents from the Bank. Ex.P.318(C) is the said Legal Opinion. He has stated that Encumbrance Certificate made available to him by the Bank for scrutiny did not disclose anything regarding mortgage in favour of the TIIC. As per Ex.P.318(C), P.W.10 has verified Encumbrance Certificates for the period from 01.01.1979 to 31.12.1984 and for the period subsequent to 17.09.1998 till the date for verification and found that there was nil encumbrance in respect of that property. But, the said Encumbrance Certificates, said to have been verified by P.W.10, are not produced. In the absence of that Encumbrance Certificates, it is not possible to infer that the said Encumbrance Certificates were not showing the mortgage in favour of the TIIC. Furthermore, it is not the evidence of P.W.10 that the Accused-6 produced those Encumbrance Certificates. As such, the evidence of P.W.10 also does not assist the Complainant to show suppression of prior mortgage relating to Plot No.8 in favour of the TIIC.
61. P.W.38-Smt.Karpagavalli, the then Law Officer working in the Zonal Office of Corporation Bank, has deposed that the Accused-6 did not disclose to the Bank about the encumbrances, if any, in respect of his property. But, she has not stated as to how she came to know that the Accused-6 did not disclose about the encumbrances. This witness has stated that Legal Opinion was taken from P.W.10 and that after verifying the documents, she prepared Legal Audit Report as per Ex.P.318(E). She has 45 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] stated in her Cross-examination that she scrutinized all the Loan Documents and found them correct. If that is so, it is not made clear as to on what basis P.W.38 has stated that the Accused-6 suppressed encumbrances in respect of his property. As such, it is not fit to accept the bare Statement of P.W.38 about the alleged suppression. Hence, the evidence of P.W.38 is also of no assistance to the Complainant.
62. Though P.W.43 has deposed about execution of documents by the Accused-5 and 6 and creation of Equitable Mortgage by the Accused-6, he has not stated anything about suppression of prior transactions by the Accused-6 in respect of his property. However, on the basis of the Statement of P.W.43 about the signature of the Accused-6 as per Ex.P.44(a) in Ex.P.44, the learned Public Prosecutor has argued that as Ex.P.44 is submitted by the Accused-6, he ought to have disclosed his liabilities including encumbrances in respect of his property bearing Plot No.8 and that as the Accused-6 has not shown his liabilities in that document, it has to be held that the Accused-6 suppressed the liabilities and encumbrances in respect of his property with an intention to cheat the Bank. But, as observed above, the evidence on record shows that the Accused-6 did not execute Ex.P.44 and that he did not submit that document to the Bank. As he did not submit that document to the Bank, question of non-disclosure in that document about liabilities and encumbrances in respect of his property by him does not 46 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] arise. Hence, it is not fit to accept the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor.
63. P.W.45-Sri.C.S.Krishnamurthy was working in Vibha Housing Finance Corporation, Bengaluru during 1999. He has deposed that the Accused-6 came to his Company as he was in need of finance against the security of his property. He has further deposed that his friend- Sri.N.Nagaraj told him through telephone that the Accused-5 was in search of collateral security and funds to execute Government Order and that 2-3 days thereafter, the Accused-2 and 5 came to his Office. He has further deposed that he introduced the Accused-6 to the Accused- 5 and that then, the Accused-2, 5 and 6 discussed about the property details and that the Accused-2 asked the Accused-6 for the Encumbrance Certificate of the property. He has further deposed that the Accused-6 showed the Encumbrance Certificate to the Accused-2 and that Ex.P.318(F) is the Xerox Copy of that document. He has further deposed that thereafter the Accused-2 and 5 getting satisfied about the documents, discussed about the funds arrangement and that roughly after one week, they went to the residence of the Accused-1 along with the Accused-2, 5 and one more person from the Bank and that there the Accused-1, 2, 5 and 6 discussed for about one hour and that after such discussion, the Accused-6 came out and told that the Accused-1, 2 and 5 asked original documents of his property and that he had handed over the same to them. He has further deposed that the Accused-5 told him and the Accused-6 that after 47 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] sanctioning of loan, he would inform them, but, he never told about sanction of loan. He has further deposed that when he enquired the Accused-5 after 10 or 15 days, the Accused-5 told him that loan was not sanctioned since property of the Accused-6 had loan on it. He has further deposed that the Accused-6 was also regularly asking as to whether the loan was sanctioned or not and that the Accused-5 was telling that the loan was not sanctioned as there was loan on the property of the Accused-6. He has further deposed that after 7 or 8 months, the Accused-6 came with a Letter of the Bank, which stated that the Accused-5 had already availed Loan of Rs.30,00,000/- and that thereafter, neither the Accused-5 nor the Accused-6 met him. The said evidence shows that the Accused-6 handed over all the original documents including Encumbrance Certificate in respect of his property in the house of the Accused-1 and that the Accused-5 was telling that loan was not sanctioned as there was prior loan on the property of the Accused-6. As such, it is clear that the Bank had knowledge of the liabilities of the Accused-6. This evidence negatives the contention of the Complainant that the Accused-6 did not disclose his liabilities and encumbrances in respect of his property.
64. The learned Public Prosecutor has strongly relied upon Ex.P.318(F) and submitted that as that document does not show any encumbrance in favour of the TIIC, it is clear that the Accused-6 has suppressed his earlier transactions in respect of his property. Ex.P.318(F) is not a original document. On the other hand, it is a Xerox 48 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Copy and it is marked subject to the objection of the Accused-6. The Complainant did not choose to produce the Original of Ex.P.318(F). As Ex.P.318(F) is a Xerox Copy only, it is not admissible in evidence and as its original is not produced, the said document has to be discarded. Even otherwise, Ex.P.318(F) does not show that it was produced by the Accused-6 to the Bank. On the other hand, the said document shows that it was obtained by one Sri.B.Raghavendra Kumar on behalf of M/s.Maxima Electronics. Said Sri.B.Raghavendra Kumar is the proper person to speak about that document. But, the Complainant has not produced the evidence of that witness. In the absence of the evidence of that witness and as Ex.P.318(F) is not obtained and produced by the Accused-6, it is not safe to rely upon to that document to appreciate the argument of the learned Public Prosecutor.
65. Ex.P.38 shows a List of 4 documents, which were deposited for creating Equitable Mortgage by the Accused-6. Those 4 documents are Permanent Certificate, Sale Deed and 2 Encumbrance Certificates. But, except the Sale Deed, other documents are not produced by the Complainant. There is no explanation from the Complainant in this regard. As the Encumbrance Certificates are very material to ascertain about prior encumbrances and as those documents are not produced by the Complainant, it is clear that the Complainant has suppressed the material evidence. These circumstances strongly go against the Complainant.
49 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
66. From the above discussion on the available facts and evidence, it is clear that though the Accused-6 stood as Guarantor and offered his property as security to the Bank in respect of Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5, there is no acceptable evidence on behalf of the Complainant to show that, he suppressed prior liabilities and transactions in respect of his property and that he had an intention to deceive the Bank, when he offered property as security. It is pertinent to observe here that there is nothing on behalf of the Complainant to show that the Accused-6 received any financial or other benefit from any of the Accused or from the Bank. As such, it is not possible to accept the contention of the Complainant that the Accused-6 cheated the Bank.
3. Cheating By The Accused-3 & 4
67. The learned Public Prosecutor has argued that the Accused-4 flouted a Company in the name of M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises and opened Current Account at Corporation Bank, V.V.Mohalla Branch, Mysuru, to which the Accused-3 is the Introducer and that the said Account was used to encash DD for Rs.4,70,000/- issued by the Accused-5 out of proceeds of the Credit Facility availed from the Bank and that the Accused-3 has withdrawn that amount through various Cheques and that thus, there is cheating by the Accused-3 and 4. In support of her arguments, the learned Public Prosecutor relied upon the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.14, P.W.40 and 50 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] P.W.42 and also Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.20, Ex.P.346 and Ex.P.347.
68. As observed above, it is not in dispute that the Accused-4 opened a Current Account at Corporation Bank, V.V.Mohalla Branch, Mysuru, as a Proprietrix of M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises and that the Accused-3 introduced that Account. P.W.1-Sri.M.V.Shridhar, who was working as Senior Manager of that Bank, has also deposed about the said fact of opening of Account by the Accused-4 and about production of Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.20, which pertain to the said Account. He has also deposed that a DD for a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- was deposited to that Account on 08.01.1999 as per Credit Slip-Ex.P.7 and that Cheques-Ex.P.8 to Ex.P.18 were issued by the Accused-4 for withdrawal of the said amount of Rs.4,70,000/-, details of which are found in Ex.P.19- Statement of Account. P.W.40-Smt.Geetha.R.Murthy, the then Clerk of the same Bank, has deposed about encashment of Self Cheques-Ex.P.9 to Ex.P.18 by the Accused-3. Ex.P.80-DD Application and Ex.P.82-Counter Foil of DD show that the said DD for Rs.4,70,000/- was issued by the Accused-5 to the Accused-4. The said evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.40 do not show anything about cheating the Bank by the Accused-3 and 4 in opening the Current Account and doing transactions in that Account. In fact, in the Cross-examination, P.W.1 himself has admitted that the Account opened by M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is a genuine Account and that there is no foul play and that transactions appeared to be normal. This 51 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] evidence of P.W.1 negatives the contention of the Complainant. As such, the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.40 do not in any way assist the Complainant to show that the Accused-3 and 4 cheated the Bank.
69. P.W.14-Sri.Mohan Rao, the then Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Mysuru, has deposed that on the request of CBI Officers, he verified the records maintained in his Office and issued Copy of Registration Certificate as per Ex.P.347 relating to M/s.Ashwini Medical and General Stores along with a Letter-Ex.P.346. Ex.P.347 shows that M/s.Ashwini Medical and General Stores was the Proprietorship Firm of the Accused-5. In Ex.P.346, it is stated that M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is not registered in the Commercial Tax Office-II Circle, Mysuru. Neither in the evidence of P.W.14 nor in Ex.P.346 and Ex.P.347, it is stated that M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is not at all in existence or it is a bogus Company. The said evidence also does not indicate anything against the Accused-3 and 4 about cheating the Bank in any manner. As such, the evidence of P.W.14 is also of no assistance to the Complainant.
70. P.W.42-Sri.Krishna Singh has deposed that he is running a Bangle Store by name-M/s.Shringar Bangle Store at Thyagaraja Road, Mysuru, since 1985 and that the building in which, he is running Bangle Store belongs to Advocate-Sri.Bhaskar Rao. He has also deposed that his Store is situated adjacent to M/s.Ashwini Medical and 52 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] General Stores, which was run by Sri.Prasad and later by his brother-the Accused-3 along with his wife the Accused-
4. He has further deposed that in that building, there was no Firm called M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises. As per the evidence of P.W.1 as well as Ex.P.1, M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is situated in No.1485, Prasad Building, Thyagaraja Road, Mysuru. It is not the evidence of P.W.42 that the said Firm is not running in the said address. According to P.W.42, M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is not running in the building belonging to Sri.Bhaskar Rao. It is not at all his evidence that M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is not at all in existence in any building on Thyagaraja Road at Mysuru. In his Cross-examination, he has stated that he has not made any attempts to know about M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises. Under these circumstances, the evidence of P.W.42 is also of no assistance either to show that M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is not at all in existence or there is cheating by the Accused-3 and 4 in any manner. On the other hand, as observed above, the evidence of P.W.1 clearly shows that the Account of M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is a genuine Account, which indicates that M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises is in existence.
71. Though P.W.43 has deposed that the Accused-3 was also present when the Loan Documents were executed by the Accused-5 and 6, he has not stated anything about the alleged cheating by the Accused-3 and
4. As such, his evidence is also of no assistance to the 53 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Complainant to substantiate his allegations against the Accused-3 and 4.
72. As observed above, it is not in dispute that the Accused-4 is the wife of the Accused-3 and that the Accused-5 is the brother of the Accused-3. Though the evidence available on record indicates that the Accused-4 received DD for Rs.4,70,000/- from the Accused-5 and that she encashed the said DD through the Accused-3 from the Bank, there is nothing to show that the said encashment was illegally made and there was dishonest intention on the part of the Accused-3 and 4 to deceive or cheat the Bank in any manner. In fact, there is no evidence to show that the Accused-3 and 4 made any transactions in the Bank relating to the Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5 so as to cause loss to the Bank. While discharging the Accused-5 from all the alleged offences, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, has held that no loss is caused either to the Bank or to the Public relating to the said Credit Facility availed by the Accused-5. On considering all these facts and circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to indicate that the Accused-3 and 4 deceived the Bank in any manner, it cannot be said that the Accused-3 and 4 cheated the Bank as alleged.
4. Cheating By The Accused-2
73. According to the Complainant, the Accused-2 had worked as a Clerk with the Accused-1 during 1985 at Hirewaddatti Branch and the Accused-1 was heading that 54 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Branch. According to the Complainant, the Accused-2 and 3 also worked together at V.V.Mohalla Branch from 1984 to 1987 and the Accused-2 was also knowing the Accused- 5, who is the elder brother of the Accused-3. These facts are not disputed.
74. According to the Complainant, the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank, helped him in availing credit facility from the Bank, arranged the Guarantor i.e., the Accused-6, filled Loan Application and siphoned funds of the Bank by conspiring with the other Accused. In order to substantiate the said contention, the learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.15 and P.W.45.
75. P.W.3 has deposed that the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank to open Current Account in the name of M/s.Chandana Agencies and that the Accused-1 permitted to open that account. He has identified Ex.P.23(a) as the signature of the Accused-5, Ex.P.23(b) as the signature of the Accused-2 for such introduction and Ex.P.23(c) as the signature of the Accused-1. Even P.W.15 has also deposed that the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank. The Accused-1 and 2 have not disputed the said evidence. These witnesses have not stated any illegalities on the part of Accused-1, 2 & 5 in respect of opening of that account, much less in respect of introduction of the Accused-5 to the Bank by the Accused-2.
55 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
76. P.W.2 has deposed that although the Accused-2 was not supposed to play any role in the matter of Loan Application of M/s.Chandana Agencies, he volunteered to help the borrower and he filled Loan Application Form for M/s.Chandana Agencies. P.W.15 has also deposed that the Accused-2 filled up the Loan Application on behalf of the Accused-5. Though it is stated by P.W.2 and P.W.15 that the Accused-2 filled Loan Application Form, they have not stated any illegality on the part of the Accused-2 in filling the Loan Application. As P.W.2 being a colleague of the Accused-3 was knowing the Accused-5 and as he himself introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank, he might have helped the Accused-5 to fill up the Loan Application Form. There is nothing on behalf of the Complainant to show any bar to fill up the Loan Application by the Accused-2. As nothing illegality is pointed out by P.W.2 and P.W.15 or any other witness in filling up the Loan Application Form by the Accused-2, it cannot be said that there was any connivance or dishonest intention on the part of the Accused-2 in filling up the Loan Application Form.
77. P.W.2 has further deposed that the Accused-2 also suppressed the fact that the Accused-3 is the brother of the Accused-5 and that the said suppression would lead to inference of connivance of the Accused-2 with the borrower and others in that branch. P.W.2 was not present in the Bank when the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank or when the Accused-2 filled up the 56 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Loan Application Form. As such, he had no chance to know as to whether relationship of the Accused-3 with the Accused-5 was suppressed or not. P.W.43 was present when the loan documents were executed by the Accused- 5 & 6. As per his evidence, the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-3, who is the brother of Accused-5, to him. This fact negatives the contention of the Complainant that the Accused-2 did not disclose the relationship between the Accused-3 & 5. Even otherwise, it is not shown as to why the Accused-2 had to disclose the relationship between the Accused-3 & 5 and what was the damage or loss or inconvenience caused to the Bank or any other person in not disclosing the said relationship.
78. As per the evidence of P.W.45, he introduced the Accused-6 to the Accused-5 and at that time, the Accused-2 was also present. It is the further evidence of P.W.45 that the Accused-2 & 5 discussed with the Accused-6 about the property details, the Accused-2 obtained Encumbrance Certificate from the Accused-6, he and the Accused-5 verified the same and that satisfied about the documents. This evidence shows that the Accused-6 was introduced to the Accused-5 by P.W.45 and not by the Accused-2. The said evidence also shows that the Accused-2 verified the property documents given by the Accused-6 for the purpose of offering surety. On the basis of those documents, P.W.10 gave Legal Opinion and P.W.38 made Legal Audit without finding any fault with those documents. Nothing illegality is pointed out against the Accused-2 from the evidence of P.W.45.
57 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Accompanying the Accused-5 and verifying the property documents by the Accused-2 to satisfy about offering that property as security in favour of the Bank cannot be said as the acts of illegality or detrimental to interest of the Bank.
79. From the above discussion, though the evidence on record shows that the Accused-2 introduced the Accused-5 to the Bank, he helped the Accused-5 in obtaining Credit Facility from the Bank by filling up Loan Application, verifying the documents of the property belonging to the Accused-6 and accompanying the Accused-5 to the Bank and to the house of the Accused-1 while executing loan documents by the Accused-5 & 6, there is nothing to show that the Accused-2 had dishonest intention of deceiving the Bank in any manner and that with that intention, he committed any illegalities so as to affect the interest of the Bank in any manner. There is also nothing to show that the Accused-2 received any financial benefits or other advantage either from the Bank or from any of the Accused from those acts. There is also nothing to show that the Bank suffered any loss from the acts of the Accused-2. On the other hand, by considering the repayment of dues by the Accused-5 and compromise between Bank and the Accused-5 and also other circumstances, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka discharged the Accused-5 from all the offences alleged, which show that no offence is involved in the said transactions with the Bank. On considering all these facts and circumstances and in the absence of any acceptable 58 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] evidence to show about illegalities of the Accused-2, it is not fit to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-2 has siphoned the funds of the Bank by colluding with the other Accused and that he thereby cheated the Bank.
5. Cheating & Criminal Misconduct By The Accused-1
80. According to the Complainant, without verifying the genuineness of the documents and creditworthiness of the Accused-5, the Accused-1 recommended for sanction of Credit Facility; he did not conduct pre and post sanction inspection; he disbursed loan amount without fulfilling conditions laid down by the Zonal Office and thereby cheated the Bank and also committed Criminal Misconduct. In order to substantiate the said contention, the Learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon the evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.4, P.W.9, P.W.13, P.W.15, P.W.20, P.W.38, P.W.43 and P.W.46.
81. In his evidence, though P.W.2 has stated that it was the duty of the Disbursing Officer to verify the genuineness of documents submitted by the borrower and guarantor and that the Branch was required to conduct pre and post sanction inspections, it is not his evidence that the Accused-1 did not make such verification and inspection. This witness has not stated anything against the Accused-1 relating to cheating and Criminal Misconduct. As per his evidence, he has no personal knowledge about the facts of this case, he did not verify 59 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] the loan account of M/s.Chandana Agencies as he was not working in the Bank when the transaction took place and he has simply lodged Complaint on the basis of Enquiry Report. As such, the evidence of this witness is of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his allegation against the Accused-1.
82. As observed above, P.W.3 is the successor of the Accused-1. He has deposed that, after the receipt of Sanction Order-Ex.P.31, the Accused-1 obtained documents in accordance with the banking procedure and the conditions stipulated in Ex.P.31. This statement shows that the Accused-1 has complied with the sanction conditions, which negatives the allegation of the Complainant that the Accused-1 violated sanction terms. However, in his evidence on 14.10.2011, P.W.3 has stated that the Regional Office imposed 17 conditions to be complied before releasing the loan and that on verification, he found that Conditions No.15 and 16 were not complied by the Accused-1. Condition No.15 relates to obtaining and sending Audited Financial Statement as on 31.3.1998 and Banker's Report relating to the Accused-6 on or before 31.1.1999. Condition No.16 relates to restriction on withdrawal of capital of the firm during the currency of loan without written consent of the Sanctioning Authority. But, in Ex.P.31, it is not stated that those two conditions should be complied before releasing the loan amount. Furthermore, it is not shown as to when actually capital of the firm was withdrawn by the borrower and what was the role of the Accused-1 in 60 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] such withdrawal. If at all, there was failure of non- sending of Audited Financial Statement and Banker's Report, it may amount to irregularity and not illegality. Furthermore, there is nothing to show that there was dishonest intention of deceiving the Bank on the part of the Accused-1 in committing such irregularity. Though, P.W.3 has also stated about the withdrawal of loan amount by the Accused-5 through Cheques-Ex.P.84 to Ex.P.212 and also referred to about Vouchers-Ex.P.213 to Ex.P.316 relating to those Cheque transactions, he has not stated anything about the illegality said to have been committed by the Accused-1 in respect of those transactions. In his Cross-examination, P.W.3 has stated that by looking into all those documents, he can say that those transactions were normal Banking transactions and that in such transactions, loan amount sanctioned can be withdrawn by issuing Self Cheques. As such, the evidence of P.W.3 is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his allegations against the Accused-1.
83. P.W.4-Sri.K.Subbarao was working as Credit Officer in the Zonal Office, Corporation Bank, Bengaluru, from July 2002 to April 2003. He has deposed about procedure regarding proposal, recommendation, sanction and disbursal of the loan in general. He has not whispered anything about the alleged illegalities on the part of the Accused-1 relating to this case. Hence, his evidence is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his case against the Accused-1.
61 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
84. P.W.9-Sri.B.Vishnumurthy Aggithaya was working as a Senior Manager in the Credit Department of Zonal Office, Corporation Bank, Bengaluru, from June- 1997 to 2000. He has deposed about procedure for recommendation and sanction of loan. He has further deposed that after receiving loan proposal from the Bank relating to M/s.Chandana Agencies, Technical Officer- Sri.Venkataramu prepared Appraisal Report as per Ex.P.318(B) and that on the basis of that Report, and by going through the documents, he recommended for sanction of Credit Facility to M/s.Chandana Agencies by imposing conditions. He has further deposed that the Branch Manager had to submit Compliance Report to the Zonal Office, but the Zonal Office did not receive such Compliance Report from the Bank. But, he has not whispered anything about the illegality against the Accused-1 relating to proposal, recommendation and disbursal of loan amount. As observed above, failure to receive the Compliance Report amounts to irregularity only and not illegality. In his Cross-examination, he has stated that on being satisfied, after perusal of records, he put up recommendation for sanction of loan before his higher ups. This Statement of P.W.9 negatives the alleged illegalities leveled against the Accused-1 by the Complainant. As this witness has not stated anything against the Accused-1 regarding the alleged illegalities, his evidence is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
62 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
85. P.W.13 though has deposed about conducting of investigation about irregularities relating to the loan account of M/s.Chandana Agencies and submission of his Report-Ex.P.344 to his Superiors, he has not stated anything against the Accused-1 relating to the illegalities, cheating or Criminal Misconduct alleged against him. The evidence of P.W.13 indicates that he has recorded Statements of several witnesses and based on those Statements, he has given his Report-Ex.P.344. The Accused-1 had no opportunity to Cross-examine those Witnesses, when their Statements were recorded by P.W.13. In the cases of K.Gunavelu & Others -Vs- CBI, ACB, Bengaluru (Criminal Appeal No.1698/2006 disposed on 09.02.2012) and CBI -Vs- Alexander (Criminal Appeal No.1855/2003 disposed on 27.06.2011), by relying upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of P.Jayappan -Vs- S.K.Perumal (AIR 1984 SC 1693), Khatri -Vs- State of Bihar (AIR 1981 SC 1068), Kishan Singh -Vs- Gurpal Singh & Others [(2010)3 SCC (Criminal) 1091] and Anil Behari Ghosh -Vs- Smt.Latika Bala Desai (AIR 1955 SC 566), it is held that the Criminal Court has to judge the case independently on the evidence placed before it and that Report in the Enquiry Proceedings and the Statements made by the witnesses in the Enquiry cannot be referred to as the Accused will have no opportunity to Cross- examine those witnesses. In the case on hand also, as there was no opportunity to the Accused-1 to Cross- examine the Witnesses referred to by P.W.13 in his 63 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Report, before giving his Report, it is not permissible to refer the Enquiry Report. As such, the Complainant cannot rely upon on that Enquiry Report. Hence, the evidence of P.W.13 and Ex.P.344 are also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
86. P.W.15 has issued Sanction Order to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2. It is his evidence that on perusal of the documents sent by the C.B.I., he was satisfied that the Accused-1 and 2 have created false documents and caused loss to the Bank to the tune of Rs.30,00,000/- and that hence, he issued Sanction Order to prosecute the Accused-1 and 2. But, he has not stated the details of those false documents and as to in what manner, the said loss was caused. He has also not stated about the alleged illegalities, amounting to cheating and Criminal Misconduct, said to have been committed by the Accused-
1. Hence, his evidence is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
87. P.W.20-Smt.Bharathi Naik was working as Chief Manager in the Zonal Office of Corporation Bank, Bengaluru, from August-1998 to June-2002. She has also deposed about the procedure for sanction of CC Facility and SBD Facility. She has identified Ex.P.350 as the document regarding Lending Policy. In her Cross- examination, she has deposed that so far as the loan account of M/s.Chandana Agencies is concerned, Senior Manager of Zonal Office scrutinized the papers and 64 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] forwarded to her by adding further queries and that after scrutinizing the papers, she instructed the Manager and the Senior Manager to call for clarification from the Branch Manager in respect of those queries. She has further deposed that as most of the queries were answered by the Branch Manager, proposal was finally sanctioned. She has further stated that the proposal sent by the Branch Manager i.e., Accused-1 was looking prima-facie a genuine one. This evidence of P.W.20 shows that after satisfying about the genuineness of proposal sent by the Accused-1, sanction of Credit Facility was accorded. This witness has also not stated anything against the Accused- 1 about the alleged illegalities. Hence, his evidence is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
88. P.W.38, as observed above, has conducted Legal Audit relating to loan documents of M/s.Chandana Agencies. She has deposed that her Office secured Legal Opinion relating to M/s.Maxima Electronics from P.W.10, who had opined that the Accused-6 had valid title in respect of the property, which he wanted to offer as security to the Bank. She has further stated that she also certified as per Ex.P.318(D) that the Advocate's opinion can be accepted. She has further deposed that Ex.P.39 is not an original document, but, it is a duplicate document and that it was the duty of the Branch Manager to seek permission from the Head Office to accept that document, which is not done by the Accused-1 in this case. She has 65 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] also deposed that the Accused-1 did not enquire with the Accused-5 about the encumbrances in respect of the property relating to the Accused-6. On seeing Ex.P.39, it is not possible to find out as to whether it is original or duplicate. P.W.10 is Panel Advocate, who has given Legal Opinion after perusal of Ex.P.39 and Encumbrance Certificates, as observed above. But, he himself could not know as to whether Ex.P.39 is original or duplicate. Though, P.W.38 gave Legal Audit Report after scrutinizing the documents and the Legal Opinion also did not find, at the initial stage, as to whether Ex.P.39 is original or duplicate. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to expect from the Accused-1 to make thorough investigation, even in the absence of any prima-facie doubt, about Ex.P.39. As observed above, Encumbrance Certificates deposited while creating equitable mortgage by the Accused-6 are not available on record. There is no basis to the statement of P.W.38 that the Accused-1 did not ascertain about the encumbrances relating to the property of the Accused-6. On the other hand, in her Cross-examination, she has specifically stated that she has no personal knowledge as to what happened to the account of M/s.Chandana Agencies. On considering all these facts and circumstances, it is not fit to rely upon the bald statement of P.W.38 that the Accused-1 failed to verify Ex.P.39 and encumbrance relating to the property of the Accused-6. Furthermore, P.W.38 has not pointed out any dishonest intention on the part of the Accused-1 to cheat or cause loss to the Bank. Hence, the evidence 66 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] of P.W.38 is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
89. P.W.43 was looking after the Credit Department, at the time, when the transactions relating to this case took place. This witness has made documentation relating to the said loan. He has deposed that all the loan documents were executed in the house of Accused-1 as the Accused-1 was on leave due to his ill-health. This witness has not stated or whispered anything against the Accused-1 about the illegalities alleged by the Complainant. Hence, his evidence is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
90. P.W.46 has deposed that file pertaining to Ex.P.62-Supply Order was not in existence in his Office, Ex.P.62 and Ex.P.368 were not the signatures of DHO- Dr.C.J.Jagadish, Medicine or Drugs as shown in Ex.P.368 were not received by his Office and that no payment was made to M/s.Chandana Agencies or to the Bank relating to Ex.P.368. Except this statement, P.W.46 has not stated anything against the Accused-1 muchless about illegalities alleged against him. Even Ex.P.62 and Ex.P.368 do not throw any light about the contention of the Complainant against the Accused-1. Hence, the evidence of P.W.46 is also of no assistance to the Complainant to substantiate his contention.
91. As observed above, none of the Witnesses relied upon by the learned Public Prosecutor has spoken about 67 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] the alleged illegalities of the Accused-1. There is nothing in the evidence of those witnesses or any other witnesses examined by the Complainant to show that the Accused-1 had dishonest intention to deceive the Bank and to induce the Bank to deliver any property or document and that with that dishonest intention, he did any act so as to deceive the Bank and to induce the Bank to deliver any property or document. There is also nothing in the evidence of those Witnesses to show that the Accused-1 abused his official position in the Bank and obtained any pecuniary advantage for himself or any other person. As observed above, a settlement took place between the Bank and the Accused-5 and as per that settlement, the Accused-5 repaid the dues to the Bank. In his Cross- examination, P.W.2 has admitted that the Bank will not compromise case of fraud committed on the Bank, even if it is a non-performing asset. Even, P.W.20 has deposed that the Bank would not enter into compromise or settlement with the Account Holder whose loan account is or was found to be fraudulent. As the Bank entered into compromise with the Accused-5, in view of the admissions of P.W.2 and P.W.20, who are the responsible Officers of the Bank, it has to be inferred that no fraud is involved in this case. In fact, by virtue of the said settlement and on considering other material on record, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has discharged the Accused-5 from all the offences alleged against him by holding that the Bank or any person has sustained loss. This circumstance also rules out any fraud or cheating relating to the loan 68 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] transaction of the Accused-5 with the Bank. As there is no such fraud or cheating, acts done by the Accused-1 relating to the said loan transaction cannot be said as illegal or fraudulent. For all these reasons, it is not possible to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-1 cheated or deceived the Bank and committed Criminal Misconduct.
6. Falsification Of Books Of Accounts And Records
92. It is alleged and charged that the Accused-1 falsified the Books of Accounts and records of the Bank willfully and with an intention to defraud the Bank. But, none of the Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant has deposed about the said allegation. There is nothing to show as to which are the Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank that were falsified by the Accused-1 and that in what manner, those falsifications were made. In the absence of such evidence, it is not fit to accept the bare contention of the Complainant that the Accused-1 is guilty of falsification of Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank.
7. Criminal Conspiracy
93. According to the Complainant, the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 entered into an illegal agreement with the Accused-5 to cheat the Bank and that in pursuance of the said agreement, they committed forgery, used the forged documents, falsified the Books of Accounts, deceived the 69 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Bank etc., and that the Accused-1 committed Criminal Misconduct of abusing his official position to obtain pecuniary advantage. There is nothing in the evidence placed by the Complainant to show that there was such an illegal agreement between the Accused-1 to 6. As observed above, though there is some evidence to show that Ex.P.46 to Ex.P.48, Ex.P.51 to Ex.P.53, Ex.P.61, Ex.P.62, Ex.P.69 and Ex.P.70 are forged documents, there is nothing to show that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 committed the said forgery; there is also nothing to show that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 used those forged documents as genuine documents; the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 cheated or deceived the Bank and that there is nothing also to show that the Accused-1 falsified the Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank and committed Criminal Misconduct. As observed above, the Accused-5 has been discharged by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka from all the offences holding that there is no loss to the Bank in the said transaction. As observed above, the facts, circumstances and the evidence on record indicate that no cheating or fraud is involved in the said loan transaction. Under these circumstances, question of entering into an illegal agreement by the Accused No.1 to 4 and 6 with the Accused-5 to cheat the Bank and committing the illegal acts of forgery, using of forged documents, falsification of Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank and Criminal Misconduct by the Accused No.1 to 4 and 6 in pursuance of the said agreement does not arise. Hence, it is impossible to accept the bare contention of the 70 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Complainant that there was Criminal Conspiracy between the Accused-1 to 6.
8. Conclusion
94. From appreciation of the facts, circumstances and the evidence available on record and discussion made, as observed above, it is clear that there is no acceptable evidence to show that the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 committed Criminal Conspiracy, Forgery, Cheating and Dishonestly inducing the Bank to part with money; the Accused-1, 2, 3 and 6 used the Forged Documents as genuine documents knowing that those documents to be forged documents and that the Accused-1 falsified the Books of Accounts and Records of the Bank with an intention to defraud the Bank and that he obtained pecuniary advantage by corrupt or illegal means or by abusing his position as Public Servant. As such, it is clear that the Complainant has failed to prove all the charges leveled against the Accused-1 to 4 and 6. For all these reasons, Points-2 to 7 are answered in the Negative.
POINT-8
95. In view of the negative findings given on the Points-2 to 7, it is clear that Complainant has failed to prove that the Accused-1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are guilty of the offences charged against them and hence, they are entitled for acquittal. In the result, the following Order is passed:
71 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] ORDER Under Section 248(1) of the Cr.P.C., 1973:
1. The Accused-1 to 4 and 6 are acquitted from the Charge for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 468 r/w. 120-B and 420 r/w.
120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860;
2. The Accused-1 to 3 and 6 are acquitted from the Charge for the offence punishable under Sections 471 r/w. 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; and
3. The Accused-1 is acquitted from the Charge for the offence punishable under Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) or 13(1)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Bail Bonds executed by the Accused-1 to 4 and 6 stand cancelled.
(Computerized by the Judgment Writers to my dictation, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 28th day of March 2017.) (ASWATHA NARAYANA) XLVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru.
72 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT WITH THE DATES OF THEIR EXAMINATION:
P.W.1 Sri.M.A.Sridhar. 21.04.2011. P.W.2 Sri.M.Damodar Kamat. 18.06.2011.
14.10.2011,
25.11.2011,
P.W.3 Sri.Govardhana Malya.
27.12.2011,
23.01.2012.
P.W.4 Sri.K.Subbarao. 25.02.2012.
17.03.2012,
P.W.5 Sri.C.S.Venkataramu. 09.04.2012,
28.04.2012.
P.W.6 Sri.Amarchand. 02.06.2012.
P.W.7 Sri.M.R.Raju. 02.06.2012.
02.06.2012,
P.W.8 Sri.T.L.Ramanna.
16.06.2012.
P.W.9 Sri.V.Vishnumurthy Aggithaya. 16.06.2012.
P.W.10 Sri.S.Ganesh Shenoy. 30.06.2012.
P.W.11 Sri.G.Shivakumar. 30.06.2012.
20.09.2012,
P.W.12 Sri.P.Jayavelan. 20.11.2012,
05.01.2013.
P.W.13 Sri.K.L.Gokuldas Nayak. 20.11.2012.
P.W.14 Sri.Mohan Rao. 06.12.2012.
P.W.15 Sri.Sudhakar.N.Bhat. 05.01.2013.
P.W.16 Sri.K.M.Ramesh. 05.01.2013.
P.W.17 Sri.B.Vasanth. 02.02.2013.
P.W.18 Sri.J.M.L.Gupta. 22.02.2013.
P.W.19 Sri.Rudraiah. 22.02.2013.
P.W.20 Smt.Bharathi Nayak. 22.02.2013.
P.W.21 Sri.D.T.Rangarajan. 22.02.2013.
73 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
P.W.22 Sr.B.L.Jaidhar. 22.02.2013.
P.W.23 Sri.K.L.Subramanya. 22.02.2013.
P.W.24 Sri.U.S.Shivashankar. 22.02.2013.
P.W.25 Sri.S.S.Lokesh. 23.02.2013.
P.W.26 Sri.D.C.Shrihari. 23.02.2013.
P.W.27 Sri.J.A.Benjamin. 23.03.2013.
P.W.28 Sri.R.S.Murthy. 23.03.2013.
P.W.29 Sri.C.S.Ramakrishnaiah. 23.03.2013.
P.W.30 Sri.B.S.Ramaprasad. 23.03.2013.
P.W.31 Sri.K.Suresh. 23.03.2013.
P.W.32 Sri.H.G.Padmanabha Rao. 23.03.2013.
P.W.33 Sri.K.Sethuram. 23.03.2013.
P.W.34 Sri.M.Venkataswamy. 23.03.2013.
P.W.35 Sri.P.Rajaram Karanth. 23.03.2013.
P.W.36 Dr.D.M.Koradanya Matt. 27.04.2013.
P.W.37 Sri.M.Raghu. 27.04.2013.
P.W.38 Smt.Karpagavalli. 27.04.2013.
P.W.39 Sri.Sridhar. 04.07.2013.
P.W.40 Smt.Geetha.R.Murthy. 04.07.2013.
P.W.41 Smt.Suman.S.Bhat. 19.07.2013.
P.W.42 Sri.Krishna Singh. 19.07.2013.
P.W.43 Sri.K.N.Vaidyanathan. 19.07.2013.
P.W.44 Sri.Vishwanath Kini. 20.07.2013.
P.W.45 Sri.C.S.Krishna Murthy. 03.08.2013.
P.W.46 Sri.K.P.Ganapathy. 24.08.2013.
P.W.47 Sri.M.Raja. 07.09.2013.
P.W.48 Sri.Bhaskar. 26.10.2013.
15.03.2014,
P.W.49 Sr.S.C.Lohia.
22.03.2014.
74 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
P.W.50 Sri.B.Suresh Kumar. 21.07.2014,
25.11.2014,
22.12.2014,
27.01.2015,
07.02.2015,
20.03.2015,
26.06.2015.
2. LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED WITH DATE OF EXAMINATION:
-NIL-
3. LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.P.1 : Current Account Opening Form of A-
4:Smt.A.C.Shrivani, Proprietrix of M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises bearing A/c No.CA780 of Corporation Bank, V.V.M., Mysuru.
Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.1.
Ex.P.1(b) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.1.
Ex.P.1(c) : Signature of A-3 in Ex.P.1.
Ex.P.2 : Specimen Signature Card of A-4.
Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.2.
Ex.P.2(b) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.2.
Ex.P.2(c) : Signature of A-3 in Ex.P.2.
Ex.P.3 : Letter of Proprietorship Dated 05.01.1999.
Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.3.
Ex.P.4 : Telephone Bill of A-4 bearing Ph.No.27327143 of April-1999.
75 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
Ex.P.5 : Form-60 of A-4.
Ex.P.5(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.5.
Ex.P.6 : Pay-in-Slip dated 05.01.1999 for
Rs.1001/- of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.7 : Credit Slip dated 08.01.1999 for
Rs.4,70,000/- of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.8 : Cheque No.398497 dated 10.01.1999 for Rs.4 Lakhs issued in favour of Sri.Padmanabha Rao by A-4.
Ex.P.8(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.8.
Ex.P.9 : Cheque No.398728 dated 14.01.1999 for Rs.20,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.9(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.9.
Ex.P.9(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.9.
Ex.P.10 : Cheque No.398727 dated 22.01.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.10(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.10.
Ex.P.10(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.10.
Ex.P.11 : Cheque No.399102 dated 29.01.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.11(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.11.
Ex.P.11(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.11.
Ex.P.12 : Cheque No.399109 Dated 02.02.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
76 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.12(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.12.
Ex.P.12(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.12.
Ex.P.13 : Cheque No.399413 dated 19.02.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.13(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.13.
Ex.P.13(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.13.
Ex.P.14 : Cheque No.399421 dated 24.02.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.14(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.14.
Ex.P.14(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.14.
Ex.P.15 : Cheque No.399653 dated 03.03.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Sri.Shankar by A-4 Ex.P.15(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.15.
Ex.P.16 : Cheque No.399665 dated 10.03.1999 of Rs.5,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.16(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.16.
Ex.P.16(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.16.
Ex.P.17 : Cheque No.202508 dated 23.03.1999 of Rs.6,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.17(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.17.
Ex.P.17(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.17.
77 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.18 : Cheque No.202537 dated 12.04.1999 of Rs.9,000/- issued in favour of Self by A-4.
Ex.P.18(a) : Signature of A-4 in Ex.P.18.
Ex.P.18(b) : Signature of A-3 on the reverse side of Ex.P.18.
Ex.P.19 : Letter Dated 18.12.2002 written from Corporation Bank, VVM Branch, Mysuru to the Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.19(a) : Signature of P.W.1 in Ex.P.19.
Ex.P.20 : Enclosures of Ex.P.19-Account Statement for the period from 01.01.1999 to 31.03.1999 and 01.01.1999 to 31.03.2000 pertaining to Current A/c. No.CA780 of Corporation Bank (2 Sheets).
Ex.P.21 : Seizure Memo Dated 13.01.2003.
Ex.P.21(a) : Signature of P.W.1 in Ex.P.21.
Ex.P.21(b) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.21.
Ex.P.22 : Complaint Dated 25.09.2002 from Corporation Bank, Residency Cross Road, Bengaluru to Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, Bengaluru (8 Sheets).
Ex.P.22(a) : Signature of P.W.2 on the Last Page of Ex.P.22.
Ex.P.23 : Current Account Opening Form of
Proprietor of M/s.Chandana
Agencies (A-5-Sri.L.Narasimha Prasad) pertaining to A/c. No. CA1799.
Ex.P.23(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.23.
78 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.23(b) : Signature of Sri.G.A.Sharma in Ex.P.23.
Ex.P.23(c) : Signature of Sri.C.Jayadev Kamath (A-1) in Ex.P.23.
Ex.P.24 : Specimen Signature Card of A-5 pertaining to A/c No.CA1799.
Ex.P.24(a) : Specimen Signatures of A-5 in Ex.P.24.
Ex.P.24(b) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.24. Ex.P.25 : Letter of Proprietorship dated 01.01.1999.
Ex.P.26 : Form-60 dated 01.01.1999 of A-5.
Ex.P.27 : Carbon Copy of "The Application for non-propriety trade advances other than vehicle loans" dated 23.12.1998.
Ex.P.27(a) : Signature of A-5 at Last Sheet of Ex.P.27.
Ex.P.28 : Original of Ex.P.27.
Ex.P.28(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.28.
Ex.P.29 : Carbon Copy of "Forwarding-cum-
Appraisal Report for Trade Advances" dated 24.12.1998.
Ex.P.29(a) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.29.
Ex.P.30 : Original of Ex.P.29.
Ex.P.30(a) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.30.
Ex.P.31 : Copy of Credit Sanction Intimation dated 01.10.1999 for Rs.20 Lakhs.
Ex.P.32 : Check List Obtained dated 07.01.1999 pertaining to Loan No.CCH-3/99 of A-5.
79 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.32(a) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.32.
Ex.P.33 : On-demand Pro-note dated 07.01.1999 of A-5 for Rs.20 Lakhs. Ex.P.33(a) : Signature of A-5 on the Revenue Stamp in Ex.P.33.
Ex.P.34 : Take Delivery Letter Dated
07.01.1999 written by A-5 to
Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar
Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.34(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.34.
Ex.P.35 : Common Deed of Hypothecation of
Movables/Assets/Debts Dated
07.01.1999 executed by A-5 in
favour of Bank.
Ex.P.35(a) : Signature of A-6 at Page-4 of
Ex.P.35.
Ex.P.36 : Guarantee Agreement Dated
07.01.1999 executed by A-5 in
favour of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.37 : Arbitration Agreement Dated
07.01.1999 executed by A-5 in
favour of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.38 : Memorandum of Deposit of Title
Deeds executed by A-6 in favour of
Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.38(a) : Signature of A-6 in Ex.P.38.
Ex.P.39 : Registered Sale Deed Dated 16.07.1997 executed in favour of A-6.
Ex.P.39(a) Signature of A-6 in Ex.P.39.
Ex.P.39(b) : Identified Signature of P.W.11 on riverside of Page-4 of Ex.P.39.
Ex.P.40 : On-demand Pro-note dated
07.01.1999 for Rs.10 Lakhs
80 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
executed by A-5 in favour of
Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.40(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.40.
Ex.P.41 : Take Delivery Note dated 07.01.1999 executed by A-5 in favour of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.41(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.41.
Ex.P.42 : Agreement for Inland/Foreign Bills obtained from A-5 in favour of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.43 : Statement of Assets and Liabilities dated 23.12.1998 of A-5.
Ex.P.43(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.43.
Ex.P.43(b) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.43.
Ex.P.44 : Statement of Assets and Liabilities dated 23.12.1998 of A-6.
Ex.P.44(a) : Signature of A-6 in Ex.P.44.
Ex.P.44(b) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.44. Ex.P.45 : Xerox Copy of Letter Dated 01.01.1999 written from District Health & Family Welfare Officer, Mysuru to A-5.
Ex.P.46 : Statement of Trading and Profit & Loss Account for the period ending 31.03.1997 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.47 : Balance Sheet as on 31.03.1997 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.48 : Xerox Copy of Certificate relating to A-5's Company given by the Chartered Accountant.
81 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
Ex.P.49 : Xerox Copy of Permanent Certificate
issued by the Department of
Industries and Commerce,
Tamilnadu in respect of A-6's
Company (M/s.Maxima Electronics).
Ex.P.50 : Xerox Copy of Legal Opinion Dated 30.03.1998 in respect of A-6's Property Ex.P.51 : Xerox Copy of Valuation Certificate for Rs.50,40,420/- in respect of building on Plot No.8, SF No.682-1, Electrical & Electronics Industrial Estate, Hosur.
Ex.P.52 : Statement of Trading and Profit & Loss Account for the period ending 31.03.1998 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.53 : Balance Sheet as on 31.03.1998 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.54 : Projected Trading and Profit & Loss Account for the period ending 31.03.1999 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.54(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.54 Ex.P.55 : Projected Balance Sheet as on 31.03.1999 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.55(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.55 Ex.P.56 : Projected Trading and Profit & Loss Account for the period ending 31.03.2000 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
82 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.56(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.56.
Ex.P.57 : Projected Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2000 of M/s.Chandana Agencies (belonging to A-5).
Ex.P.57(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.57.
Ex.P.58 : Projected Profitability Statement of A-5's Company.
Ex.P.58(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.58.
Ex.P.59 : Cash Flow Statement of A-5's Company.
Ex.P.59(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.59.
Ex.P.60 : Xerox Copy of Lease Deed Dated 21.09.1998 executed in favour of A- 5 in respect of Property situated at Nandini Layout between Sri.K.Seturam and M/s.Chandana Agencies.
Ex.P.60(a) : Endorsement with Seal & Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.60.
Ex.P.60(b) : Identified Signature of P.W.33 in Ex.P.60.
Ex.P.61 : Xerox Copy of Supply Order Dated 29.10.1998 issued in favour of A-5's Company by the District Health & Family Welfare Officer, Mysuru.
Ex.P.61(a) : Endorsement with Seal and signature of A-1 in Ex.P.61.
Ex.P.62 : Xerox Copy of Supply Order Dated 05.12.1998 issued in favour of A-5's Company by the District Health & Family Welfare Officer, Mysuru.
Ex.P.62(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.62.
83 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.63 : Xerox Copy of Supply Order Dated 28.12.1998 issued in favour of A-5's Company by the Additional Director (Projects), Health & Family Welfare Department, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.63(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.63.
Ex.P.64 : Xerox Copy of Letter Dated Nil
written to A-5's Company by the
Additional Director (Projects),
Health & Family Welfare
Department, Bengaluru regarding Supply of Gynaec Tables.
Ex.P.64(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.64.
Ex.P.65 : Xerox Copy of Certificate Dated 14.02.1997 issued by the Assistant Director of Industries and Commerce Department to A-5's Company.
Ex.P.65(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.65.
Ex.P.66 : Xerox Copy of Certificate Dated 30.03.1996 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to A-5's Company.
Ex.P.66(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.66.
Ex.P.67 : Xerox Copy of Registration Certificate dated 30.03.1996 in Form-B issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to A-5's Company.
Ex.P.67(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.67.
Ex.P.68 : Form-2 of M/s.Chandana Agencies.
84 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.68(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.68.
Ex.P.69 : Xerox Copy of Quotation Dated 10.12.1998 issued in favour of A-5's Company by M/s.Southern Machine Tools.
Ex.P.69(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.69.
Ex.P.70 : Xerox Copy of Quotation Dated 10.12.1998 issued in favour of A-5's Company by M/s.Sri Saraswathi Medicals.
Ex.P.70(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.70.
Ex.P.71 : Xerox Copy of Return of Turn Over (Form-4) submitted by A-5.
Ex.P.71(a) : Endorsement with Seal and Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.71.
Ex.P.72 : Valuation Report Dated 01.01.1999 belonging to A-6.
Ex.P.73 : Letter Dated 24.12.1998 from
Corporation Bank, Rajajnagar
Branch, Bengaluru to Assistant
General Manager, Regional Office, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.73(a) : Signature of A-1 in Last Page of Ex.P.73.
Ex.P.73(b) : Signature of P.W.5 on the overleaf of 3rd Sheet of Ex.P.73.
Ex.P.74 : Letter Dated 01.01.1999 from M/s.Chandana Agencies to Senior Manager, Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.74(a) : Signature of A-5 on Last Page of Ex.P.74.
85 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
Ex.P.75 : Letter Dated 02.01.1999 from
Corporation Bank, Rajajnagar
Branch, Bengaluru to Assistant
General Manager, Regional Office, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.75(a) : Signature of A-1 in Ex.P.75.
Ex.P.76 : Letter Dated 30.01.2001 addressed to Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, Hosur from Corporation Bank, Rajajnagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.76(a) : Initials of P.W.3 at the Bottom of Ex.P.76.
Ex.P.76(b) : Seal & Signature of Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited as Acknowledgement for Ex.P.76.
Ex.P.77 : Photo Copy of Letter Dated 20.02.2001 from Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, Hosur to Senior Manager, Corporation Bank, Rajajnagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.78 : Cheque No.205552 Dated 07.01.1999 issued by A-5 in the name of Corporation Bank for Rs.11,20,000/-.
Ex.P.78(a) : Signature of A-5 with Seal of his Firm in Ex.P.78.
Ex.P.79 : DD Application dated 07.01.1999 of A-5's Company for Rs.6,50,000/-. Ex.P.79(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.79.
Ex.P.80 : DD Application dated 07.01.1999 of A-5's Company for Rs.4,70,000/-.
Ex.P.80(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.80.
86 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.81 : Counter Foil of DD No.507702 dated 07.01.1999 favouring M/s.Skanda Enterprises for Rs.6,50,000/-.
Ex.P.82 : Counter Foil of DD No.507703 dated 07.01.1999 favouring M/s.Mahalakshmi Enterprises for Rs.4,70,000/-.
Ex.P.83 : Cheque No.205551 Dated 04.01.1999
issued by A-5 in favour of
Sri.Narasimha for Rs.3,50,000/-.
Ex.P.83(a) : Signature of A-5 in Ex.P.83. Ex.P.84 : Cheque No.205554 dated 10.01.1999 for Rs.10,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.85 : Cheque No.205553 dated 08.01.1999 for Rs.16,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.86 : Cheque No.205557 dated 13.01.1999 for Rs.12,850/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Balaji Electronics.
Ex.P.87 : Cheque No.205558 dated 14.01.1999 for Rs.4,272/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Bank for purchasing DD.
Ex.P.88 : Cheque No.205559 dated 21.01.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.89 : Cheque No.205560 dated 21.01.1999 for Rs.65,195/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Bank for purchasing DD.
Ex.P.90 : Cheque No.205556 dated 13.01.1999 for Rs.2,300/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Radhakrishna.
Ex.P.91 : Cheque No.205562 dated 27.01.1999 for Rs.6,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
87 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.92 : Cheque No.205561 dated 25.01.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing.
Ex.P.93 : Cheque No.205563 dated 27.01.1999 for Rs.1,605/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Tulasi Corporation.
Ex.P.94 : Cheque No.205564 dated 29.01.1999 for Rs.24,491/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.95 : Cheque No.205566 dated 31.01.1999 for Rs.21,533/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Prasad Medicals.
Ex.P.96 : Cheque No.205567 dated 03.02.1999 for Rs.61,938/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.97 : Cheque No.205568 dated 03.02.1999 for Rs.13,820/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Gururaj Pharmaceutical.
Ex.P.98 : Cheque No.205569 dated 08.02.1999 for Rs.1,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.99 : Cheque No.205571 dated 10.02.1999 for Rs.6,030/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Bank for purchasing DD.
Ex.P.100 : Cheque No.205572 dated 12.02.1999 for Rs.45,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.101 : Cheque No.205573 dated 13.02.1999 for Rs.50,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Narasimha.
Ex.P.102 : Cheque No.205574 dated 13.02.1999 for Rs.75,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Ramakrishna.
88 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.103 : Cheque No.226305 dated 17.02.1999 for Rs.25,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Rajaramshetty.
Ex.P.104 : Cheque No.226301 dated 15.02.1999 for Rs.1,15,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Skanda Enterprises.
Ex.P.105 : Cheque No.226304 dated 16.02.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.106 : Cheque No.226308 dated 19.02.1999 for Rs.12,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Ramachandra.
Ex.P.107 : Cheque No.226307 dated 18.02.1999 for Rs.4,937/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.108 : Cheque No.226310 dated 20.02.1999 for Rs.10,784/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.109 : Cheque No.226306 dated 18.02.1999 for Rs.25,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Narasimha.
Ex.P.110 : Cheque No.226309 dated 20.02.1999 for Rs.1,189/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.111 : Cheque No.226302 dated 15.02.1999 for Rs.548/- drawn by A-5 in favour of RBI Account, Accounts Officer Telephone Department(AOTD).
Ex.P.112 : Cheque No.226312 dated 24.02.1999 for Rs.5,025/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Yourself for issuance of Pay Order.
Ex.P.113 : Cheque No.226311 dated 24.02.1999 for Rs.16,721/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
89 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.114 : Cheque No.205575 dated 27.02.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.115 : Cheque No.226313 dated 27.02.1999 for Rs.6,086/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.116 : Cheque No.226318 dated 02.03.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.H.S.Sandhya.
Ex.P.117 : Cheque No.226320 dated 01.03.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.118 : Cheque No.226319 dated 02.03.1999 for Rs.2,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.V.Krishnaswamy.
Ex.P.119 : Cheque No.226322 dated 03.03.1999 for Rs.20,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Keshavamurthy.
Ex.P.120 : Cheque No.226316 dated 02.03.1999 for Rs.720/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Shridhar.
Ex.P.121 : Cheque No.226314 dated 01.03.1999 for Rs.4,504/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.122 : Cheque No.226315 dated 01.03.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.K.L.Mala.
Ex.P.123 : Cheque No.226321 dated 02.03.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.D.P.Nalini.
Ex.P.124 : Cheque No.226303 dated 15.02.1999 for Rs.30,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.K.L.Mala.
90 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.125 : Cheque No.226326 dated 10.03.1999 for Rs.3,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.K.L.Mala.
Ex.P.126 : Cheque No.226328 dated 10.03.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Keshavamurthy.
Ex.P.127 : Cheque No.226325 dated 09.03.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.128 : Cheque No.226327 dated 10.03.1999 for Rs.27,463/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.129 : Cheque No.226324 dated 12.03.1999 for Rs.2,894/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.130 : Cheque No.226329 dated 13.03.1999 for Rs.3,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Naveen.
Ex.P.131 : Cheque No.226323 dated 12.03.1999 for Rs.5,102/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.132 : Cheque No.226330 dated 15.03.1999 for Rs.14,075/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.133 : Cheque No.226331 dated 13.03.1999 for Rs.13,554/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Prasad Medicals.
Ex.P.134 : Cheque No.226336 dated 19.03.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.K.L.Mala.
Ex.P.135 : Cheque No.226332 dated 15.03.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
91 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.136 : Cheque No.226333 dated 20.03.1999 for Rs.19,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Mukesh Medicals.
Ex.P.137 : Cheque No.226341 dated 21.03.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Raju.
Ex.P.138 : Cheque No.226340 dated 21.03.1999 for Rs.6,025/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Bank for purchasing DD.
Ex.P.139 : Cheque No.226335 dated 20.03.1999 for Rs.17,565/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.140 : Cheque No.226334 dated 19.03.1999 for Rs.4,704/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.141 : Cheque No.226339 dated 22.03.1999 for Rs.8,300/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Mukesh Medico.
Ex.P.142 : Cheque No.226338 dated 23.03.1999 for Rs.5,025/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajesh Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.143 : Cheque No.226337 dated 19.03.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.S.Nagaraj.
Ex.P.144 : Cheque No.226342 dated 25.03.1999 for Rs.15,854=35 drawn by A-5 in favour of Ashalaya.
Ex.P.145 : Cheque No.226348 dated 30.03.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.Mala.
Ex.P.146 : Cheque No.226347 dated 30.03.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
92 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.147 : Cheque No.226346 dated 30.03.1999 for Rs.4,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Kandan Associates.
Ex.P.148 : Cheque No.226349 dated 30.03.1999 for Rs.13,047/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.149 : Cheque No.226343 dated 27.03.1999 for Rs.18,200/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Mukesh Medico.
Ex.P.150 : Cheque No.226345 dated 29.03.1999 for Rs.35,528/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.151 : Cheque No.226344 dated 27.03.1999 for Rs.6,250/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Sindhu Tech.
Ex.P.152 : Cheque No.226353 dated 04.04.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Nalini.
Ex.P.153 : Cheque No.226351 dated 03.04.1999 for Rs.2,944/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.154 : Cheque No.226350 dated 03.04.1999 for Rs.7,111/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajesh Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.155 : Cheque No.226357 dated 08.04.1999 for Rs.57,670/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Yourself.
Ex.P.156 : Cheque No.226356 dated 07.04.1999 for Rs.2,223/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Prasad Medicals.
Ex.P.157 : Cheque No.226355 dated 06.04.1999 for Rs.2,200/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
93 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.158 : Cheque No.226361 dated 10.04.1999 for Rs.2,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of K.Sethuram.
Ex.P.159 : Cheque No.226359 dated 10.04.1999 for Rs.3,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Markline Agencies.
Ex.P.160 : Cheque No.226362 dated 10.04.1999 for Rs.7,632/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Guru Ayurvedhic Agencies.
Ex.P.161 : Cheque No.226358 dated 14.04.1999 for Rs.6,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Jayanna.
Ex.P.162 : Cheque No.226363 dated 14.04.1999 for Rs.4,200/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Kandan Associates.
Ex.P.163 : Cheque No.226354 dated 14.04.1999 for Rs.43,095/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadish & Co.
Ex.P.164 : Cheque No.226364 dated 16.04.1999 for Rs.8,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.Mala.K.L. Ex.P.165 : Cheque No.226365 dated 16.04.1999 for Rs.2,208=55 drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajesh Pharceuticals.
Ex.P.166 : Cheque No.226366 dated 16.04.1999 for Rs.10,011/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajavinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.167 : Cheque No.226367 dated 16.04.1999 for Rs.3,066/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.168 : Cheque No.779245 dated 23.04.1999 for Rs.5,500/- issued on Cash Credit No.3/99 in favour of P.K.Rao.
94 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.169 : Cheque No.226369 dated 21.04.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.170 : Cheque No.226368 dated 23.04.1999 for Rs.13,745/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.171 : Cheque No.226371 dated 28.04.1999 for Rs.3,645/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.172 : Cheque No.226373 dated 29.04.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Self.
Ex.P.173 : Cheque No.226360 dated 20.04.1999 for Rs.952/- drawn by A-5 in favour of RBI, AOTD.
Ex.P.174 : Cheque No.226377 dated 02.05.1999 for Rs.2,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of V.Krishnaswamy.
Ex.P.175 : Cheque No.226372 dated 05.05.1999 for Rs.14,551/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadish & Co.
Ex.P.176 : Cheque No.226376 dated 02.05.1999 for Rs.25,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Krishnamurthy.
Ex.P.177 : Cheque No.226375 dated 01.05.1999 for Rs.15,468/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.178 : Cheque No.226374 dated 30.04.1999 for Rs.5,956/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Prasad Medicals.
Ex.P.179 : Cheque No.226380 dated 07.05.1999 for Rs.2,082/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Suresh.
95 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.180 : Cheque No.226370 dated 12.05.1999 for Rs.5,283=84 drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Ravi Enterprises.
Ex.P.181 : Cheque No.226384 dated 11.05.1999 for Rs.5,698/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.SS Pharma.
Ex.P.182 : Cheque No.226385 dated 15.05.1999 for Rs.4,302/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajesh Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.183 : Cheque No.226386 dated 15.05.1999 for Rs.5,771/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
Ex.P.184 : Cheque No.226390 dated 18.05.1999 for Rs.5,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Manjunath.
Ex.P.185 : Cheque No.226387 dated 14.05.1999 for Rs.3,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Siraj.
Ex.P.186 : Cheque No.226389 dated 17.05.1999 for Rs.45,055/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Deepak Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.187 : Cheque No.226394 dated 20.05.1999 for Rs.15,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.Mala.
Ex.P.188 : Cheque No.226391 dated 19.05.1999 for Rs.2,500/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Arman Marketing Private Limited.
Ex.P.189 : Cheque No.226388 dated 18.05.1999 for Rs.19,962/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Praveen Pharma.
Ex.P.190 : Cheque No.226381 dated 10.04.1999 for Rs.550/- drawn by A-5 in favour of ACCT, 20th Circle.
96 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.191 : Cheque No.226382 dated 10.04.1999 for Rs.600/- drawn by A-5 in favour of ACCT, 20th Circle.
Ex.P.192 : Cheque No.226392 dated 19.05.1999 for Rs.11,502/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.193 : Cheque No.226393 dated 26.05.1999 for Rs.8,634/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.194 : Cheque No.226396 dated 05.06.1999 for Rs.25,532/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.195 : Cheque No.226398 dated 05.06.1999 for Rs.1,837/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.V.Krishnaswamy.
Ex.P.196 : Cheque No.226397 dated 07.06.1999 for Rs.12,980/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Raja Vinayaka Drugs.
Ex.P.197 : Cheque No.226395 dated 10.06.1999 for Rs.3,893=76/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Ravi Enterprises.
Ex.P.198 : Cheque No.226399 dated 14.06.1999 for Rs.42,837/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.199 : Cheque No.032006 dated 22.06.1999 for Rs.10,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Shridhar.
Ex.P.200 : Cheque No.032001 dated 18.06.1999 for Rs.1,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Mahesh Enterprises.
Ex.P.201 : Cheque No.032005 dated 24.06.1999 for Rs.17,630/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Deepak Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.202 : Cheque No.032003 dated 25.06.1999 for Rs.12,295/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Vikram Agencies.
97 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.203 : Cheque No.032004 dated 22.06.1999 for Rs.20,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of N.K.Deepak Kumar.
Ex.P.204 : Cheque No.032002 dated 25.06.1999 for Rs.11,462=50 drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Rajesh Pharmaceuticals.
Ex.P.205 : Cheque No.226379 dated 07.05.1999 for Rs.1,495/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Outlook.
Ex.P.206 : Cheque No.032007 dated 30.06.1999 for Rs.17,901/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.207 : Cheque No.032008 dated 02.07.1999 for Rs.17,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.208 : Cheque No.032009 dated 07.07.1999 for Rs.16,511/- drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Jagadeesh & Co.
Ex.P.209 : Cheque No.032010 dated 10.07.1999 for Rs.4,101=60 drawn by A-5 in favour of M/s.Ravi Enterprises.
Ex.P.210 : Cheque No.032015 dated 08.08.1999 for Rs.20,050/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Yourselves for purchasing DD.
Ex.P.211 : Cheque No.226351 dated 30.03.1999 for Rs.4,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Sri.Jayanna.
Ex.P.212 : Cheque No.226317 dated 02.03.1999 for Rs.2,000/- drawn by A-5 in favour of Smt.K.L.Mala.
Ex.P.213 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 10.02.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.10/-.
98 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.214 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 16.02.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.100/-.
Ex.P.215 : Credit Challan Dated 02.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.968/-.
Ex.P.216 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 06.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.49,000/-.
Ex.P.217 : Credit Challan Dated 21.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,944/-.
Ex.P.218 : Credit Challan Dated 21.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.430=58.
Ex.P.219 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 27.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.430=58.
Ex.P.220 : Credit Challan Dated 31.03.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.380/-.
Ex.P.221 : Credit Challan Dated 07.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.723/-.
Ex.P.222 : Credit Challan Dated 07.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.810/-.
Ex.P.223 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 16.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.12,000/-.
Ex.P.224 : Credit Challan Dated 15.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,017/-.
Ex.P.225 : Credit Challan Dated 16.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,746/-.
99 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.226 : Credit Challan Dated 16.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,047/-.
Ex.P.227 : Credit Challan Dated 16.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.237=71.
Ex.P.228 : Transfer Debit Voucher Dated 20.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,746/-.
Ex.P.229 : Credit Challan Dated 13.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,910/-.
Ex.P.230 : Credit Challan Dated 21.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.20,000/-.
Ex.P.231 : Credit Challan Dated 20.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.827=02.
Ex.P.232 : Credit Challan Dated 29.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,390/-.
Ex.P.233 : Credit Challan Dated 24.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.510=26.
Ex.P.234 : Credit Challan Dated 23.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,590/-.
Ex.P.235 : Credit Challan Dated 24.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,392/-.
Ex.P.236 : Credit Challan Dated 04.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.767/-.
Ex.P.237 : Credit Challan Dated 05.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.742/-.
100 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.238 : Credit Challan Dated 05.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.10,268/-.
Ex.P.239 : Credit Challan Dated 16.04.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,008/-.
Ex.P.240 : Credit Challan Dated 11.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.883/-.
Ex.P.241 : Credit Challan Dated 11.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,796/-.
Ex.P.242 : Credit Challan Dated 11.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.227/-.
Ex.P.243 : Credit Challan Dated 11.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.971=58.
Ex.P.244 : Credit Challan Dated 15.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.100/-.
Ex.P.245 : Credit Challan Dated 18.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.802/-.
Ex.P.246 : Credit Challan Dated 18.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.532/-.
Ex.P.247 : Credit Challan Dated 15.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.428/-.
Ex.P.248 : Credit Challan Dated 15.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.737=92.
Ex.P.249 : Credit Challan Dated 01.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,100/-.
101 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.250 : Credit Challan Dated 01.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.358/-.
Ex.P.251 : Credit Challan Dated 01.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.308/-.
Ex.P.252 : Credit Challan Dated 29.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,166/-.
Ex.P.253 : Credit Challan Dated 25.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,047/-.
Ex.P.254 : Credit Challan Dated 25.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.304/-.
Ex.P.255 : Credit Challan Dated 29.05.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.963=13.
Ex.P.256 : Credit Challan Dated 08.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,236/-.
Ex.P.257 : Credit Challan Dated 08.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.883/-.
Ex.P.258 : Credit Challan Dated 08.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.424/-.
Ex.P.259 : Credit Challan Dated 07.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.802/-.
Ex.P.260 : Credit Challan Dated 08.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,125/-.
102 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.261 : Credit Challan Dated 18.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4889=25.
Ex.P.262 : Credit Challan Dated 12.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.942/-.
Ex.P.263 : Credit Challan Dated 14.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.310/-.
Ex.P.264 : Credit Challan Dated 22.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,202/-.
Ex.P.265 : Credit Challan Dated 25.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.20,000/-.
Ex.P.266 : Credit Challan Dated 22.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,711/-.
Ex.P.267 : Pay-in-slip Dated 26.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,000/-.
Ex.P.268 : Credit Challan Dated 26.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,154/-.
Ex.P.269 : Pay-in-slip Dated 29.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4,000/-.
Ex.P.270 : Credit Challan Dated 29.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4,205/-.
Ex.P.271 : Pay-in-slip Dated 03.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.2,000/-.
103 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.272 : Credit Challan Dated 03.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.15,000/-.
Ex.P.273 : Credit Challan Dated 06.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,500/-.
Ex.P.274 : Credit Challan Dated 06.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,355=21.
Ex.P.275 : Credit Challan Dated 08.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.6,050/-.
Ex.P.276 : Credit Challan Dated 08.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.6,869=50.
Ex.P.277 : Credit Challan Dated 08.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.2,297/-.
Ex.P.278 : Credit Challan Dated 10.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.19,000/-.
Ex.P.279 : Credit Challan Dated 15.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,551=60.
Ex.P.280 : Pay-in-slip 16.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.12,900/-.
Ex.P.281 : Credit Challan Dated 16.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.542/-.
Ex.P.282 : Credit Challan Dated 16.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.6,283/-.
104 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.283 : Credit Challan Dated 22.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,694=80.
Ex.P.284 : Credit Challan Dated 29.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.8,446=35.
Ex.P.285 : Credit Challan Dated 03.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.6,382/-.
Ex.P.286 : Credit Challan Dated 05.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.11,090/-.
Ex.P.287 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,485/-.
Ex.P.288 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4,985/-.
Ex.P.289 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.8,985/-.
Ex.P.290 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,985/-.
Ex.P.291 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.29,985/-.
Ex.P.292 : Credit Challan Dated 08.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,985/-.
Ex.P.293 : Credit Challan Dated 10.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.2,071/-.
105 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.294 : Credit Challan Dated 05.12.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.15 Lakhs.
Ex.P.295 : Credit Challan Dated 07.12.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.15 Lakhs.
Ex.P.296 : Credit Challan Dated 12.12.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.10 Lakhs.
Ex.P.297 : Debit Challan Dated 04.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,166/-.
Ex.P.298 : Debit Challan Dated 19.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.100/-.
Ex.P.299 : Debit Challan Dated 22.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,154/-.
Ex.P.300 : Debit Challan Dated 22.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.10/-.
Ex.P.301 : Debit Challan Dated 24.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4,608/-.
Ex.P.302 : Debit Challan Dated 26.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.10/-.
Ex.P.303 : Debit Challan Dated 08.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.1,991/-.
Ex.P.304 : Debit Challan Dated 09.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.25/-.
106 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.305 : Debit Challan Dated 17.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.2,030/-.
Ex.P.306 : Debit Challan Dated 20.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.342/-.
Ex.P.307 : Debit Challan Dated 20.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,941/-.
Ex.P.308 : Debit Challan Dated 29.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.3,370/-.
Ex.P.309 : Debit Challan Dated 31.07.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.4,455/-.
Ex.P.310 : Debit Challan Dated 05.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,941/-.
Ex.P.311 : Debit Challan Dated 07.08.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.5,678/-.
Ex.P.312 : Debit Challan Dated 08.12.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.15 Lakhs.
Ex.P.313 : Debit Challan Dated 09.12.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.15 Lakhs.
Ex.P.314 : Debit Challan Dated 02.02.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.8,798/-.
Ex.P.315 : Debit Challan Dated 15.06.1999 pertaining to A-5's Account for Rs.802/-.
107 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.316 : Debit Voucher Dated 12.02.1999 pertaining to M/s.Chandan Agencies Account for Rs.10 Lakhs.
Ex.P.317 : Xerox Copy of Chapter-14 & 25 of Manual-Instructions relating to Supply Bill Discounting & procedure to be adopted in case of Supply Bills Discounting and Cash Credit Hypothecation.
Ex.P.318 : File pertaining to M/s.Chandana Agencies maintained in the Regional Office of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.318(A) : Letter dated 31.12.1998 from Corporation Bank, Residency Road, Bengaluru to Senior Manager, Corporation Bank, Credit Department, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru regarding Credit proposal of M/s.Chandana Agencies.
Ex.P.318(A-a) : Identified Signature of Sri.A.Mohan Rao, Assistant General Manager, Corporation Bank in the 2nd Sheet of Ex.P.318(A).
Ex.P.318(A-b) : Identified Initials of P.W.4 in the 1st Sheet of Ex.P.318(A).
Ex.P.318(B) : Office Note dated 02.01.1999 put up by P.W.4 at Page Nos-84 to 93 in Ex.P.318.
Ex.P.318(B-a) : Identified Initials of P.W.4 in the Last Page of Ex.P.318(B).
Ex.P.318(B-b) : Identified Signature of Sri.Mohan Rao in the Last Page of Ex.P.318(B). Ex.P.318(B-c) : Identified Signature of P.W.9 in the Last Page of Ex.P.318(B).
Ex.P.318(B-d) : Identified Signature of P.W.20 in the Last Page of Ex.P.318(B).
108 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.318(C) : Legal Opinion/Scrutiny Report offered by P.W.10 to the Bank in respect of documents pertaining to P.Raja Pandian, the Proprietor of M/s.Maxima Electronics.
Ex.P.318(c-a) : Identified Signature of P.W.10 in the Last Page of Ex.P.318(C).
Ex.P.318(D) : Letter dated 02.01.1999 from
P.W.38 to the Senior Manager,
Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru
regarding the Legal Opinion certified the title of Applicants.
Ex.P.318(D-a) : Identified signature of P.W.38 in Ex.P.318(D).
Ex.P.318(E) : Legal Audit Report dated 06.03.1999 at Pages-118 & 119 of Ex.P.318 prepared by P.W.38.
Ex.P.318(E-a) : Identified signature of P.W.38 in Ex.P.318(E).
Ex.P.318(f) : Xerox Copy of EC. Ex.P.319 : Letter Dated 22.01.1999 from
Corporation Bank, Residency Road, Bengaluru to Senior Manager, Credit Department, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru regarding M/s.Chandana Agencies Borrowal Accounts at Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.319(a) : Identified Initials of P.W.4 in Ex.P.319.
Ex.P.320 : Reminder Dated 15.05.1999 of Ex.P.319 prepared by P.W.4.
Ex.P.320(a) : Identified Initials of P.W.4 in Ex.P.320.
Ex.P.320(b) : Signature of Sri.A.Mohan Rao in Ex.P.320.
109 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
Ex.P.321 : Certified Copy of Ledger Extract
(Account Statement) of
M/s.Chandana Agencies for the
period from 01.04.1998 to
31.03.2001 of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.322 : Stock Statement of Cash Credit
Account dated 05.02.1999
submitted to the Bank pertaining to M/s.Chandana Agencies.
Ex.P.323 : Encumbrance Certificate bearing No.425 of Guarantor mortgaged to M/s.Chandana Agencies pertaining Sy.No.682/1, P.No.8, Industrial Estate.
Ex.P.324 : Encumbrance Certificate bearing No.433 of Guarantor mortgaged to M/s.Chandana Agencies pertaining Sy.No.682/1, P.No.8, Industrial Estate.
Ex.P.325 : Receipt No.563687 towards requisite fee paid to obtain Ex.P.323 issued by the Joint Sub-Registrar, Hosur.
Ex.P.326 : Receipt No.586516 towards requisite fee paid to obtain Ex.P.324 issued by the Joint Sub-Registrar, Hosur. Ex.P.327 : Seizure Memo dated 23.07.2003.
Ex.P.327(a) : Identified Signature of P.W.12 on the 3rd Sheet of Ex.P.327.
Ex.P.328 : Allotment Order dated 14.12.1976 issued from the Government of Tamilnadu. Department of Industries and Commerce, Electrical and Electronics Branch.
Ex.P.328(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.328.
Ex.P.329 : Indenture Registered Document dated 09.06.1978 executed between M/s.Maxima Electronics and 110 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Sri.P.Rajapandian and Sri.A.Sivarama Krishnan.
Ex.P.329(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.329.
Ex.P.330 : Third Schedule containing Terms and Conditions of Sanction of Assistance Dated 29.06.1977.
Ex.P.330(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.330 List.
Ex.P.331 : Memorandum to be held on 26.03.1991 submitted to the Executive Committee in respect of TIIC EC No.135/90-91.
Ex.P.331(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.331. Ex.P.332 : Letter Dated 04.04.1991 regarding Sanction of Financial Assistance from TIC, Hosur to M/s.Maxima Electronics, Hosur.
Ex.P.332(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.332. Ex.P.333 : Registered Deed of Mortgage dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited (M/s.TIIC Ltd.). Ex.P.333(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.333.
Ex.P.334 : Hypothecation Deed dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of M/s.TIIC Ltd.
Ex.P.334(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.334.
Ex.P.335 : Guarantee Deed dated 18.04.1991 executed by Sri.P.Rajapandian.
Ex.P.335(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.335.
Ex.P.336 : Agreement Deed dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of M/s.TIIC Ltd.
111 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.336(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.336.
Ex.P.337 : Undertaking dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of M/s.TIIC Ltd.
Ex.P.337(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.337.
Ex.P.338 : Modification Deed dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of TIIC Ltd.
Ex.P.338(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.338.
Ex.P.339 : Power of Attorney Dated 18.04.1991 executed by M/s.Maxima Electronics in favour of M/s.TIIC Ltd.
Ex.P.339(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.339.
Ex.P.340 : Affidavit dated 06.05.1991 of Sri.Tirupandian.
Ex.P.340(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.340.
Ex.P.341 : Certificate No.29/1977 dated 16.04.1991 issued by the Registrar of Firms in Form-A in the name of M/s.Maxima Electronics (Document is in Tamil Language).
Ex.P.341(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.341.
Ex.P.341(B) : English Translated Copy of Ex.P.341.
Ex.P.342 : Letter dated 13.08.1990 written by
M/s.Maxima Electronics to the
Manager of M/s.TIIC Ltd.
Ex.P.342(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.342.
Ex.P.343 : Copy of Letter dated 17.05.1999
written from Sri.P.Ramaswamy,
CTO, Hosur to the General Manager, M/s.TIIC Ltd., Chennai.
112 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.343(A) : Xerox Copy of Ex.P.343.
Ex.P.344 : Investigation Report dated 06.02.2002 issued from Sri.K.L.G.Nayak, Manager, Vigilance Cell, Head Office, Mangaluru.
Ex.P.345 : Letter dated 10.12.2001 written by the Officer of District Health & Family Welfare Department, Mysuru to the Manager of Corporation Bank (Vigilance Cell), Mangalore regarding Supply of Medicines by M/s.Chandana Agencies.
Ex.P.346 : Letter dated 27.05.2004 from CTO, Mysuru to the Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.346(a) : Identified Signature of P.W.14 in Ex.P.346.
Ex.P.346(b) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.346.
Ex.P.347 : Xerox Copy of Registration Certificate No.25339175 issued in favour of A-5.
Ex.P.348 : Sanction Order dated 16.08.2004 issued from Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru.
Ex.P.348(a) : Identified Signature of P.W.15 in the Last Sheet of Ex.P.348.
Ex.P.349 : Sanction Order dated 16.08.2004 issued from Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru.
Ex.P.349(a) : Identified Signature of P.W.15 in the Last Sheet of Ex.P.349.
Ex.P.350 : Letter dated 21.02.2003 from
Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar
Branch to the Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru regarding Investigation of CBI Case of 113 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] M/s.Chandana Agencies with a Circular issued by the DGM (Credit Department), Corporation Bank to the Senior Manager, Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar Branch regarding Lending/Working Capital Assessment.
Ex.P.350(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.350.
Ex.P.351 : Computer Generated Statement of Current Account No.2358 of State Bank of Mysore pertaining to M/s.Ashwini Medical & General Stores for the period from 01.01.1999 to 10.05.2003.
Ex.P.352 : Computer Generated Statement of Current Account No.11543 (OD Account) of State Bank of Mysore pertaining to M/s.Ashwini Medical & General Stores for the period from 01.01.1999 to 29.09.2003.
Ex.P.353 : Notarized Copy of State Bank of Mysore, Gayathrinagar Branch, Bengaluru Current Account Opening Form bearing No.9/867 relating to M/s.Skanda Enterprises.
Ex.P.354 : Notarized Copy of Ledger Sheet Extract in respect of Account No.9/867 of State Bank of Mysore, Gayathrinagar Branch, Bengaluru pertaining to M/s.Skanda Enterprises.
Ex.P.355 : Notarized Copy of Fixed Deposit
Receipt dated 17.01.1999 for
Rs.6,50,000/- of State Bank of
Mysore, Gayathrinagar Branch,
Bengaluru pertaining to M/s.Skanda Enterprises.
Ex.P.356 : Notarized Copy of Letter dated 15.02.1999 regarding Closure of Fixed Deposit from M/s.Skanda 114 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Enterprises to the Manager, State Bank of Mysore, Gayathrinagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.357 : Notarized Copy of Letter dated 27.09.1999 regarding closure of Current Account No.867 from M/s.Skanda Enterprises to of State Bank of Mysore, Gayathrinagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.358 : Notarized Copy of Current Account Opening Form bearing No.457 dated 16.01.1991 of Sri.K.Thyagarajan. Ex.P.359 : Account Opening Form of State Bank of Mysore, Krishnamurthy Puram Branch, Mysuru pertaining to M/s.Ashwini Medicals & General Stores in respect of Current Account No.2358.
Ex.P.359(a) : Identified Signature of P.W.32 in Ex.P.359.
Ex.P.360 : Xerox Copy of Letter/Supply Order
from Government of Karnataka,
Health & Family Welfare
Department, Bengaluru to
M/s.Chandana Agencies regarding Supply of Gynaec Tables.
Ex.P.361 : Valuation Certificate Dated 14.04.1998 issued by Sri.Venkataswamy, Civil Engineer for Rs.50,40,420/-.
Ex.P.362 : Copy of SSI(Small Scale Industries) Certificate No.18/05/02325/PMT/SSI dated 18.04.1979 issued in the name of Sri.Raja Pandian Proprietor of M/s.Maxima Electronics.
Ex.P.363 : Xerox Copy of Sale Deed Dated 16.07.1997 executed between Government of Tamilnadu and M/s.Maxima Electronics.
115 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]
Ex.P.364 : Copy of Layout Sketch issued from
Government of Tamilnadu,
Department of Industries &
Commerce.
Ex.P.365 : Copy of Sketch of Plot-8 issued from
Administrative Officer, Electrical & Electronics Industrial Estate, Hosur.
Ex.P.366 : Xerox Copy of Legal Opinion Dated 30.03.1998 offered by P.W.37 of Sri.Raja Pandian, Proprietor of M/s.Maxima Electronics.
Ex.P.367 : Certified True Copy of Extract of Owtward Bill Collection Register of Corporation Bank.
Ex.P.367(a) : Entry dated 12.02.1999 for Rs.17,38,000/- in Ex.P.367.
Ex.P.368 : Cash/Credit Bill No.16 dated 30.01.1999 of M/s.Chandana Agencies to Department of Health & Family Welfare, Mysuru.
Ex.P.369 : Bunch of documents like Copies of Letters dated 20.12.1976;
05.11.1977; Sanction Order dated 26.03.1991; Repayment Schedule & Rate of Interest of M/s.Maxima Electronics-Annexure-I; Letters dated 18.04.1991, 10.07.1998;
Sanction Order dated 16.07.1997; Plan Approved by Deputy Director of T&C Planning of Plot No.8; Letters dated 26.03.1999 & 18.09.1991;
Description of Title Deeds; Letters dated 16.12.1999, 02.08.1999, 26.05.1999 and 26.03.1999;
Document in Tamil Language signed by Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation; Mahazar dated 05.05.1998; Letters dated 22.04.1999,30.01.2001,20.02.2001, 16.04.1991 & 19.03.2002 & Status 116 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Report of M/s.Maxima Electronics dated 09.04.2002.
Ex.P.370 : Search List dated 19.06.2004 pertaining to residential premises of Sri.P.Rajapandian.
Ex.P.370(a) : Signature of P.W.48 on the Last Page of Ex.P.370.
Ex.P.370(b) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.370. Ex.P.371 : Letter dated 01.11.2003 from LIC of India, Madurai to Sri.Raja Pandian.
Ex.P.372 : Letter dated 26.09.2003 from Sri.P.Raja Pandian to M/s.Pamban Mills Limited, Theni.
Ex.P.373 : Blank Letter Head of M/s.Maxima Electronics.
Ex.P.374 : Photographs-2.
Ex.P.375 : Bunch of documents containing Loan Re-payment details on the Letter Head of M/s.Maxima Electronics dated 28.07.1998, Photocopy of Cheque No.032052 dated 15.09.2000 for Rs.1,00,000/-;
Photocopy of the DD No.363239 dated 06.09.2003 for Rs.25,000/-; Letter dated 10.04.1999 from Indian Overseas Bank to M/s.Maxima Electronics-3 Sheets; Letter dated 10.09.2003 from M/s.Maxima Electronics to the Managing Director, Tamil Naidu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, Chennai alongwith Balance Sheets as on 31.03.1995 to 31.03.1997;
Letter dated 12.04.1990 from
Department of Industries &
Commerce to A-6; Original Deed of
Retirement dated 28.03.1988;
Original Amended Partnership Deed dated 30.05.1978; Original Deed of 117 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Retirement of Partner; Release Deed dated 29.05.1978 and Original Partnership Deed dated 24.12.1976.
Ex.P.376 : GEQD Report/Opinion dated 31.12.2003.
Ex.P.376(a) : Signature of P.W.49 in Ex.P.376.
Ex.P.376(b) : Signature of Sri.A.K.Singh in Ex.P.376.
Ex.P.377 : Document marked as Q-1 - Letter
dated 12.02.1999 from
M/s.Chandana Agencies to the
Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.378 : Document marked as Q-3 - Copy of
Delivery Memo No.11 dated
30.01.1999 of M/s.Chandana
Agencies to Department of Health & Family Welfare, Mysuru.
Ex.P.379 : Document marked as Q-4 - Copy of
Delivery Memo No.11 dated
30.01.1999 of M/s.Chandana
Agencies to Department of Health & Family Welfare, Mysuru.
Ex.P.380 : Document marked as S-1 - Writings of A-5.
Ex.P.381 : Document marked as S-2 - Writings of A-5.
Ex.P.382 : Document marked as S-3 - Writings of A-5.
Ex.P.383 : Document marked as S-4 - Writings of A-5.
Ex.P.384 : Documents marked as S-5 -
Writings of A-5.
Ex.P.385 : Documents marked as S-6 -
Signatures of A-5.
118 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.386 : Documents marked as S-7 -
Signatures of A-5.
Ex.P.387 : Documents marked as S-8 -
Signatures of A-5.
Ex.P.388 : Documents marked as S-9 -
Signatures of A-5.
Ex.P.389 : Documents marked as S-10 -
Signatures of A-5.
Ex.P.390 : Reasons for Opinion (Ex.P.376) given by P.W.49.
Ex.P.391 : Forwarding Letter dated 23.01.2004 from P.W.49 to CBI.
Ex.P.392 : FIR dated 15.11.2002.
Ex.P.392(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.392.
Ex.P.393 : Seizure Memo dated 07.01.2003 pertaining to seized File-Ex.P.318. Ex.P.393(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.392.
Ex.P.394 : Handing Taking Over Letter dated 10.01.2003.
Ex.P.394(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.394.
Ex.P.395 : Handing/Taking Over Memo dated 11.02.2003.
Ex.P.395(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.395.
Ex.P.396 : Letter dated 10.03.2003 from Corporation Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Bengaluru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru. Ex.P.396(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.396.
Ex.P.397 : Remaining certain pages of File (File containing 1 to 304 pages) (Certain pages in the File are already marked as Ex.P.360 to Ex.P.366).
119 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.398 : Handing/Taking Over Memo dated 18.05.2003 along with Provisional VAT Registration Certificate dated 01.04.2003 of M/s.Ashwini Medicals & General Stores; Form-4-2Nos.-
Sales Tax Returns for the period from 01.04.1998 to 31.03.1999 & 1.04.1999 to 31.03.2000 pertaining to A-5 and Statement of Monthly Turn Over for the month of March-
2001.
Ex.P.398(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.398.
Ex.P.399 : Letter dated 17.07.2003 from the
Sub-Registrar, Registration
Department, Hosur (TN) to
Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru along with Certificate of Encumbrance on property EC No.238 dated 17.07.2003 and Sale Deed dated 16.07.1997 executed between Government of Tamilnadu and A-6.
Ex.P.399(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.399.
Ex.P.400 : Letter dated 18.07.2003 along with its enclosures from Indian Overseas Bank, Hosur to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.401 : Letter dated 17.07.2003 along with its enclosures from State Bank of Mysore, Krishnamurthy Puram Branch, Mysuru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.401(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.401.
Ex.P.402 : Seizure Memo dated 24.07.2004.
Ex.P.402(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.402.
120 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.403 : Seizure Memo dated 25.08.2003 along with Copy of Account Opening Form of Sri.H.G.Padmanabha Rao.
Ex.P.403(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.403.
Ex.P.404 : Letter dated 16.09.2003 along with its enclosures from Government of Karnataka, Drugs Control Department to Inspector of Police CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.404(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.404.
Ex.P.405 : Handing/Taking Over Memo dated 12.10.2003.
Ex.P.405(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.405.
Ex.P.406 : Letter dated 04.04.2003 along with
its enclosures from Corporation
Bank, Rajajinagar Branch,
Bengaluru to Inspector of Police, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.406(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.406.
Ex.P.407 : Letter dated 08.10.2003 along with its enclosures from Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.407(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.407.
Ex.P.408 : Production Memo dated 17.10.2003 along with its enclosures.
Ex.P.408(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.408.
Ex.P.409 : Letter dated 14.10.2003 along with its enclosures from Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.409(a) : Signature of P.W.50 in Ex.P.409.
121 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J] Ex.P.410 : Receipt Memo dated 20.10.2003 along with its enclosures.
Ex.P.411 : Letter dated 03.11.2003 from Government of Karnataka, Commissioner of Health Family Welfare Services to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.412 : Letter dated 25.07.2004 along with its enclosures form Corporation Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
Ex.P.413 : Letter dated 01.09.2004 along with its enclosures from Corporation Bank, Head Office, Mangaluru to Inspector of Police, CBI, Bengaluru.
4. LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:
-NIL-
5. LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
-NIL-
(ASWATHA NARAYANA) XLVII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge & Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru.
122 [Spl.C.C.253/2004-J]