Delhi District Court
Kumar Fraudulently Diverted The Funds ... vs Ravinder Kr. Etc. Page 26 Of 4 on 26 December, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TALWANT SINGH
DISTRICT& SESSIONS JUDGE (EAST)
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
A.C.No.54/2016
FIR/RC No. DAI 2011 A 0010
CNR No:DLKA010011562011
Under Sections 120B IPC read with
Section 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section
under Section 13(2) read with Section
13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Central Bureau of Investigation
versus
1.Sh.Ravinder Kumar S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal R/o B2/302, Sunny Valley, CGHS, Plot No.27, Sector12, Dwarka, Delhi.
2. Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal R/o H.No.400, Ward No.34, Janta Colony, Rohtak, Haryana. ...Accused persons J U D G M E N T Accused Ravinder Kumar and Rajesh Kumar Sharma have been sent to face trial for offences under Section 120B IPC read with Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 1 of 40 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act and substantive offences thereof.
2. The case of the prosecution is that present FIR was registered on the basis of source information. It is alleged that during the period 2004 to 2008, accused Ravinder Kumar, Assistant Manager (F) of RITES Ltd. in connivance with his coaccused Rajesh Kumar Sharma and others fraudulently withdrew the funds of RITES Ltd.
3. It is case of the CBI that all the employees of RITES Ltd. were covered by Group Saving Linked Insurance Scheme (GSLIS) against which premium for the policy was payable to the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) partly by RITES and employees, which was deducted from their salary. On death of an employee or cessation of service (retirement/termination/discharge etc.), total amount of the member was payable to him. On cessation of employment of an employee, Personnel & Administration (P&A) Division of RITES used to prefer a claim to LIC and on the basis of same, LIC made payment in favour of RITES. After receiving cheques of payment, P&A Division used to send cheques to Finance & Accounts Division for deposit in RITES account along with details of employees. Thereafter, cheque payment voucher used to be prepared on the basis of relevant documents and record and then bank cheque payment voucher used to be sent to Banking Division for preparation of cheques and obtaining signatures of authorized signatories thereon and for onward remittance to the beneficiary.
4. In the present case, accused Ravinder Kumar had A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 2 of 40 prepared as many as 20 Bank Cheque Payment Vouchers using his personal access code and "option 3" entering fictitious payee names similar to his own name, name of his brother i.e. accused Rajesh Kumar and in another name and thus managed to get 20 cheques prepared from RITES and misappropriated the same. It was revealed during investigation that no payment was received from LIC regarding GSLI claims in respect of 20 cheques and that there was no regular employee in the name of R.K. Sharma, Rajesh Kumar etc. employed with RITES, who had ceased to be employee of the company becoming eligible for such payment. It was further revealed that above said bank cheque payment vouchers were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar and his signatures thereon were identified by the officers of the company. Officers of the company have stated that finally the cheques in question were handed over to accused Ravinder Kumar for dispatch thereof to the beneficiaries. 12 cheques in question were got deposited by accused Ravinder Kumar in his bank accounts and he got encashed the same, whereas accused Rajesh Kumar deposited 8 cheques in question in his various bank accounts and got them encashed. It is further alleged that accused persons caused a total loss of Rs.10,25,789/ to RITES Ltd. and corresponding gain to themselves.
5. Documents filed on record by the CBI show that various bank accounts were got opened by accused Rajesh Kumar Sharma and accused Ravinder Kumar in which the cheques in A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 3 of 40 question were deposited. The cheques in question were seized by the CBI on which accused Ravinder Kumar committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and used the same as genuine having reason to believe to be forged. CBI has also filed the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Specimen handwriting and signatures of the accused were taken and sent to Expert for comparison. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed.
6. After hearing Ld. Counsel for accused persons as well as Ld. PP for the CBI, charges were framed against the accused persons to which they pleeaded not guilty and claimed trial.
7. In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined as many as 37 witnesses and their testimony shall be dealt with in later part of the judgment.
8. On conclusion of evidence of the CBI, statements of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.were recorded in which they denied the case of CBI and stated that they have been falsely implicated. DW1 Sh. Pramod Kapur has been examined on behalf of accused persons. He has stated that he is partner of M/s J.L.Garg & Company, CA firm( KMGS & Associates), who were the statutory auditors of M/s RITES Ltd for the financial year ending 31.03.2004. During the course of their assignment, they had examined and audited the books of accounts of M/s RITES Ltd. including the transactions relating to Provident Fund and Group Savings Linked Insurance (GSLI). No A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 4 of 40 fraud was detected in both the schemes till 31.03.2004. In his cross examination, he has stated that if any reconciliation had not taken place or any fraud had taken place, which was to be detected at internal audit level, the same having no bearing on the overall Profit & Loss account of M/s RITES Ltd., the same could not be detected during the course of their statutory audit.
9. I have heard arguments advanced by Ld. PP for the CBI as well as Ld. Counsel for accused persons. I have carefully gone through record of the case.
Evidence of officers of RITES:
10. PW1 Sh. Mohan Lal Gautam has deposed that accused Ravinder Kumar was working as Assistant Manager in F & A Division of RITES. A disciplinary enquiry was going on against him in respect of GSLI claim and ultimately he was dismissed from service. Order of penalty awarded to the accused Ravinder Kumar has been proved as Ex.PW1/A and his dismissal order has been proved as E.PW1/B. Letter of the CBI asking for certain information has been proved as Ex.PW1/C and reply of RITES in this regard has been proved as Ex.PW1/D and other letters and correspondence sent with reply have been proved as Ex.PW1/E to PW1/J1.
11. PW20 Sh.Anurag Tripathi had handed over ACR record of accused Ravinder Kumar for the year 1996 to 1999 and 2004 to 2008 Ex.PW20/B1 to B9 and same were seized vide Sezure memo Ex.PW20/A. A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 5 of 40
12. PW21 Sh.Anirudha Thakur was working as Manager(Personnel) in RITES and he handed over documents to the CBI pertaining to departmental case against accused Ravinder Kumar. Documents were seized by the CBI vide Seizure memo ExPW21/A; chargesheet is Ex.PW21/B1 and enquiry file is Ex.PW21/B2. Document were also seized vide memo Ex,PW21/C to Ex.PW21/H.
13. PW2 Sh.Krishan Kumar Kapoor, AGM (Finance) RITES has stated F&A Division of RITES handles all the financial transactions. Accused Ravinder Kumar was working in the Establishment Section of F&A Division and was handling all the matters relating to payments of advances to the staff from Provident Fund, receiving the PF contributions of staff and RITES into PF Trust account, investment of funds of RITES PF Trust, payment of and accounting contribution of employees of RITES and employer to GSLI(Group Saving Linked Insurance Scheme) to LIC; receiving claims from LIC in respect of employees who retired, resigned and on death and corresponding payment of these claims were made to the employees or their nominees.
14. PW2 further stated that duties of accused Ravinder Kumar remained same irrespective of post held by him for a period of more than 10 years and during said period all relevant records pertaining to abovesaid duties remained in establishment section of F & A Division in the custody of dealing official i.e. accused Ravinder Kumar. He further deposed that accused Ravinder Kumar was A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 6 of 40 responsible for processing the payments; preparing bank cheque payment vouchers for release of payment in the name of beneficiaries; entering data into Financial Management Information System(FMIS); printing the cheques in the name of beneficiaries and putting the cheques before authorized signatories. PW2 further stated that he was one of such signatories. He had handed over several vouchers and letters to the CBI vide Production cum Seizure Memo Ex.PW2/A. Vide this seizure memo several Bank Vouchers, Clearance Certificate, PayinSlips; copies of cheques; documents relating to departmental enquiry against accused Ravinder Kumar and his Bank details, Ex.PW2/A1 to A43 were handed over to the CBI and seized by it. PW2 has also proved cheque in the name of R.K.Sharma as Ex.PW2/B and letter Ex.PW2/DA written by CBI to the GM(Finance) RITES asking for details as to who had prepared vouchers and cheques.
15. PW3 Sh. Yashpal Johar, AGM (Admn.) RITES Ltd. has deposed that as per record, there were no regular employees by the names of R.K.Sharma, Rajesh Kumar or Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal during the period 04.02.2004 to 04.06.2008 and on the request of CBI, he had written letter Ex.PW3/A to the CBI in this regard.
16. PW5 is Mrs.M.Ahuwalia. She was Manager (Accounts), RITES from March, 2005 to December, 2005. At that time, accused Ravinder Kumar was Desk Officer and responsible for ensuring that payments in respect of GSLI claims were received from A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 7 of 40 LIC. He deposed that payment vouchers were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. He has proved cheque Ex.PW5/A in the name of R.K.Sharma for a sum of Rs.34,376/. He has also proved Bank voucher Ex.PW5/A13 and letter written by RITES to the CBI has been proved as Ex.PW5/DA.
17. PW6 Sh.Sunil Khurana has deposed that during the period 2005, he was posted as Manager(Finance). All GSLI payments used to be handled by accused Ravinder Kumar. Duties of accused Ravinder Kumar were to receive payments from LIC and make payments to the beneficiaries. Accused Ravinder Kumar used to enter details of payments into FMIS using his password/code and then generate vouchers. He has proved cheque Ex.PW6/B for sum of Rs. 32,446/ in favour of R.K.Sharma under GSLI claim. He has proved Bank voucher Ex.PW6/A11 and Ex.PW6/A15 and cheques Ex.PW6/B, Ex.PW6/C & Ex.PW6/E in the name of R.K.Sharma, whereas cheques Ex.PW6/D & Ex.PW6/F are in favour of Rajesh Kumar. He has also proved GSLI register as Ex.PW6/G. This register was never shown by accused Ravinder Kumar for getting the vouchers checked.
18. PW7Sh. R.S.Bhatnagar has also stated that accused Ravinder used to handle payments of GSLI claims to the concerned employees and entire payment process was done by accused Ravinder Kumar such as preparing vouchers and cheques in favour of beneficiaries. He has proved the Bank vouchers Ex.PW7/A A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 8 of 40 Ex.PW7/D and Ex.PW7/G; whereas cheques Ex.PW7/B and Ex.PW7/E are in favour of Rajesh Kumar; cheque Ex.PW7/C is in favour of R.K.Sharma and cheques Ex.PW7/F and Ex.PW7/H are in favour of Rajesh Kumar Sharma. Letter written by RITES Ltd. to the CBI has been proved as Ex.PW7/DA. He has further deposed that being the Desk Officer, it was responsibility of accused Ravinder Kumar to ensure that GSLI payments were made to the right beneficiaries.
19. PW8 Sh.Akhil Narain Bhatnagar is also officer of RITES. He has also deposed that accused used to prepare vouchers and cheques for the beneficiaries. He was one of the signatories and he used to sign the voucher in token of having checked the same. Thereafter, he used to hand back the voucher to accused Ravinder, who prepared cheque in the name of beneficiary and give it to him. He has proved Bank voucher Ex.PW8/A. Cheues Ex.PW8/B and Ex.PW8/D are in the name of Rajesh Kumar, whereas cheque Ex.PW8/C is in the name of R.K.Sharma. Annual Performance Appraisal Ex.PW8/E and Ex.PW8/F for the year 2006 and 2007 were handed over to the CBI. Letter of RITES written to CBI has been proved as Ex.PW8/G.
20. PW9 Sh.Anil Ghai has also deposed that Ravinder Kumar was responsible to process the payment for GSLI to eligible employees after verification of records. PW9 was to sign cheques, based on voucher documents put up to him by Banking Section. He A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 9 of 40 has proved Bank voucher Ex.PW9/A and Ex.PW9/A1 and his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is Ex.PW9/DA.
21. PW11 Sh. J.S.Yadav was working as Joint General Manager (Finance). He deposed that GSLI payment vouchers used to be prepared by concerned dealing/Desk official. He had signed the GSLI payment cheues after checking the names printed on the vouchers and cheques.
22. PW12 Ms.Manjula S.Rao was also a signatory to the cheques on behalf of RITES. She stated that cheque Ex.PW6/B is in the name of R.K.Sharma; cheque Ex.PW12/A bears her signatures. She stated that all payment vouchers pertaining to payment of GSLI claims used to be prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. After she signed the cheques, same along with vouchers were returned to the Banking Section.
23. PW13 Sh. Subhash Chander Chhabra has also deposed that all the payments vouchers pertaining to payment of GSLI claims used to be prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. He stated that at the relevant time, the responsibility of the cheque signing authority was only to check the payee name, amount of cheque, cheque number and date of cheque.
24. PW14 Sh.V.S.Kalra has stated that he had submitted a list of cheques payments made on behalf of RITES in respect of which corresponding payments were not received from LIC relating to GSLI. Letter of RITES to the CBI in this regard is Ex.PW14/A. He has also A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 10 of 40 proved Human Resource Management Manual as Ex.PW14/A1. Cheques in favour of R.K.Sharma have been proved as Ex.PW14/B to Ex.PW14/D.
25. PW15 Sh. Sanjeev Rai Kumar has stated that at the time of signing the cheque, he verified the amount and name of payee. As per prevalent practice, there was no need to verify the documents and it was responsibility of the person preparing the voucher and the person checking the voucher as all records remained with them.
26. PW18 Sh.Rajesh Sehra has stated that he had handed over certain documents such as medical reimbursement claim, original bank payment vouchers, reimbursement of tuition, fee, leave encashment, telephone charges reimbursement etc. containing admitted handwriting/signatures of Ravinder Kumar, who was working in RITES and these documents were seized vide memo Ex.PW18/A. These documents have been proved as Ex.PW18/B1 to Ex.PW18/B10 and Ex.PW18/C to Ex.PW18/H.
27. PW18 further stated that on the basis of verification, details and confirmations received from Axis Bank, some facts relating to fraudulent payments pertaining to GSLI were noticed during the period from 04.02.2004 to 04.06.2008. Total 20 fraudulent cheque payments pertaining to GSLI totaling to Rs.10,25,789/ were noticed in respect of which accused Ravinder Kumar prepared all the bank cheque payment vouchers by entering data into FMIS of RITES, through which all the fraudulent cheques were printed. He further A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 11 of 40 stated that 11 cheques were printed through which funds of RITES were diverted to the account of accused Ravinder Kumar maintained with Axis Bank; accused Ravinder Kumar had prepared all the said 11 bank cheque payment vouchers through which cheques were printed in the beneficiary name of accused R.K.Sharma.
28. PW18 further stated that 3 cheques were also printed in the beneficiary name of Rajesh Kumar and funds of RITES Ltd. were credited to the account of Sh. Rajesh Kumar maintained with Punjab & Sindh Bank. One cheque was also credited to the account of Rajesh Kumar. Two cheques in the name of Rajesh Kumar were credited to the account of Rajesh Kumar maintained with HDFC Bank. Two cheques in the name of Rajesh Kumar were transferred to the account of Rajesh Kumar maintained with Canara Bank. One another cheque was credited to joint account of accused Ravinder Kumar and his wife Bala Devi maintained with Axis Bank.
29. PW18 stated that all the bank cheque payment vouchers through which above cheques were printed, were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. All the aforesaid funds of RITES Ltd. were diverted to the accounts of accused Ravinder Kumar and Rajesh Kumar maintained in different banks. He has identified both the accused persons.
30. PW22 Sh.Shyam Sunder Bhatia was working in F&A Division of RITES and was posted in Banking Section in 2003 and worked there till March 2006. He has stated that payment A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 12 of 40 vouchers pertaining to GSLI payments were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar and cheques for these vouchers were also prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. He further stated that 13 original cheques were got printed by him and after getting the signatures from authorized signatory and thereafter that cheques were handed over to accused Ravinder Kumar against acknowledgment for receiving the cheques on vouchers.
31. PW23 Smt.Rita Handa has stated that during the period from 2004 to 2008, no documented procedure for payment of GSLI dues was available in RITES. She has stated that as per practice, the documents received from P&A Division as well as GSLI Register being maintained by then dealing officer i.e. Ravinder Kumar were retained by him only and were not submitted with the voucher at the time of putting up the same to the cheque signatories.
32. PW24 is Sh.Rajiv Ratn Sr.DGM(Finance), RITES Ltd. He has stated that accused Ravinder Kumar was working under him from 2003 to 2004. He has proved Payinslips Ex.PW24/1 to Ex.PW24/10 of UTI Bank Ltd. in the name of R.K.Sharma bearing initials of accused Ravinder Kumar. Application for medical reimbursement submitted by accused Ravinder in his own handwriting and signature has been proved as Ex.PW24/11. He has also stated that payment vouchers were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar.
33. PW27 Sh.Pyush Nanda, DGM, RITES has stated that GSLI register for the period 2006 to 2008 was sent to Vigilance A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 13 of 40 Department of RITES at Laxmi Nagar.
34. PW28 Sh.K.N.Aggarwal has stated that accused Ravinder Kumar was responsible for processing payment towards GSLI in case of retired employees/death cases, preparing vouchers and putting up the same for payment and to ensure that payments towards GSLI received from LIC and further proceedings for payment to retired employees or to their nominees. He has stated that Bank Voucher Ex.PW28/1 and Ex.PW28/2 were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar.
35. PW29 Sh.Atma Prasad Dubey was posted in Banking Section of RITES. According to him, vouchers and cheques were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. He has seen cheque No. 90555 for Rs.48560/ in the name of Rajesh Kumar Sharma; cheque No.94070 for Rs.61,856/ in the name of Rajesh Kumar Sharma and cheque No.81845 for Rs.49,816/in the name of Rajesh Kumar and cheque No. 81843 for Rs.40,578/ in the name of R.K.Sharma. These cheques were received by accused Ravinder. All the said cheques were handed over to accused Ravinder Kumar for making payment to concerned payees through dispatch from Dispatch Section.
36. PW30 Ms. Jyoti, Assistant Manager (Finance), was working as Accountant under accused Ravinder Kumar and has identified handwriting and signatures of accused Ravinder on various documents such as his ACRs and vouchers.
37. PW31 is Sh. Bhupender Singh. Accused Ravinder A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 14 of 40 Kumar was working under supervision of PW31. He has stated that Sh. Akhil Bhatnagar, Manager (F &E) was initiating authority for ACR of accused Ravinder Kumar; this witness was Reviewing Authority, whereas M.Mahalingam was Accepting authority. He has proved ACR of accused for the year 2006 to 2008 by this witness.
38. PW32 Sh.M.Parameswaran had handed over certain service documents of accused Ravinder Kumar to the CBI vide letter Ex.PW32/A; Declaration of accused for the purpose of LTC Ex.PW32/B; Declaration for claiming medical Expenses Ex.PW33/C; Declaration and Nomination Form Ex.PW32/D and Declaration and Nomination form for RCPF Ex.PW32/F.
39. PW33 Sh. Navakishore Sahoo has stated that he was a Programmer in RITES. He stated that at the time of preparing payment vouchers, FMIS asks the user to enter choice whether payment is to be made to '1. employee', '2. Party' & '3.others'. First option was to be opted, when payment was to be made to employees of RITES; second option was meant for making any type of payment to the party i.e. consultant/contractor or supplier etc. of RITES and third option was for making payment to those who do not fall in category '1' or '2'. In case of option '3', the system asked the user to enter the party name to whom the payment was to be made. In case of payment to nominee of deceased employee, the Desk Officer was required to exercise option '3'. He further stated that till the year 2005, the field 'party name' which contains name of payee, was not printed A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 15 of 40 on the vouchers due to space constraint. This system was improved in the year 2006 and a second line was introduced for printing of party name.
40. During internal investigation carried out by F&A Division of RITES, PW33 was asked to give reprint of the voucher No.8582 dated 31.03.2005; he gave the print out, which is Ex.PW28/2 and same contains the name of Smt. Bala Devi as one of the payee and this voucher was prepared by accused Ravinder Kumr by using his access code and passport by choosing option '3'.
41. PW33 further stated that all the vouchers pertaining to GSLI payments were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar including the payment vouchers. The staff of Banking Division can not, in any way, alter the contents of the data.
42. PW34 Ms. Ruchi Arora has stated that she had given certified copy of production cum seizure memo dated 26.08.2009 along with certified copy of account opening form of account No. 007010100048374 in the name of accused Ravinder Kumar and Bala Devi and vide statement of account Ex.PW4/A, there is credit entry of Rs.2,98,142/ from the account of RITES to this account. Evidence of Bank officials:
43. PW4 Sh.Mani Shankar, Senior Manager, Axis Bank has stated that during year 2011, he was posted as Manager with Axis Bank at Statesman House, Barakhamba Road, Delhi. On request of CBI, he had supplied statement of account of Ravinder Kumar in A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 16 of 40 respect of SB account No. 007010100048374 for the period 22.06.2001 to 30.09.2011 and same has been proved as Ex.PW4/A and forwarding letter in this regard has been proved as Ex.PW4/B. Certified copy of account opening form is Ex.PW4/C and same were seized vide Seizure memo Ex.PW4/D.
44. PW10 Sh.Ram Parsad Jain, Officer of Punjab & Sind Bank, Naya Bazar, Delhi states that he had handed over statement of account Ex.PW10/B along with copy of account opening form Ex.PW10/D and other documents Ex.PW35/A of A/C No. 10817 in the name of accused Rajesh Kumar to the CBI and same were seized vide memo Ex.PW10/C. According to statement of account Ex.PW10/B, clearing cheques for Rs.21,986/, Rs.49,816 and Rs.44,833/ were credited to this account and certain withdrawals were also made.
45. PW35 Sh. Hemant Sharma from Punjab & Sind has stated that he had forwarded copy of account opening form Ex.PW35/A of SB Account No. 10817 in the name of Rajesh Kumar.
46. PW6 Sh. Prabhat Kumar, Officer, Canara Bank, Uttam Nagar Branch has stated that he handed over documents, i.e., cheque Ex.PW16/B; Payinginslip Ex.PW16/C and Ex.PW16/D in the name of Rajesh Kumar Sharma; copy of the cheque Ex.PW16/E in the name of Rajesh Kumar and certified copy of Production cum seizure Memo Ex.PW16/F to the CBI and same were seized vide memo Ex.PW16/A by the CBI. Vide letter Ex.PW16/G, another set of A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 17 of 40 documents, i.e., account opening form of account No. 2379101012826 in the name of Rajesh Kumar Sharma; transactions details of two cheques as mentioned in letter Ex.PW16/H of RITES; statement of account Ex.PW16/J; certified copy of letter Ex.PW16/K; another statement of account Ex.PW16/L were handed over to the CBI. As per statement of account Ex.PW16/J, cheques for Rs.45,678/ and 61,856/ were credited to this account.
47. PW19 Sh Sikander Baig, Assistant Manager, HDFC Bank, Chandni Chowk, Delhi has stated that he had handed over Pay inSlip Ex.PW19/B of HDFC Bank in the name of Rajesh Kumar; copy of production cum seizure memo dated 3.01.2011 Ex.PW19/C along with certified copy of letter dated 13.012011; certified copy of account opening form of Account No.02171000037246 and account No.02171600001375 in the name of Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Shimbhu Dayal and statement of account No. 02171600001375 and same were seized vide Production cum Seizure Memo Ex.PW19/A.
48. PW26 Sh.Vivek Kumar Varshney, Sr.Manager Axis Bank, had handed over 38 documents viz. details of 13 cheques; pay in slip of UTI Bank Ltd., statements of account of RITES and same were seized vide by CBI vide Memo Ex.PW26/A. Vide Clearance Certificate Ex.PW26/B issued by Axis Bank, it was intimated that cheque for Rs.2,98,142/ was credited to the account of Ravinder Kumar and Smt Mala Devi.
A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 18 of 40Investigation witnesses:
49. PW36 Inspector Pramod Kumar has stated that vide production cum seizure memo Ex.PW36/A, certain payinslips and cheques were seized by the CBI. PW17 Sh. Jasvinder Singh has stated that specimen writing and signatures of accused Rajesh Kumar and Ravinder Kumar were taken in his presence.
50. PW37 Inspector S.K.Khullar has proved FIR Ex.PW37/A registered in the present case. During investigation, he had seized relevant documents; recorded statements of witnesses and obtained handwriting expert opinion.
51. The evidence in this case is primarily documentary evidence duly supported with oral evidence of the witnesses. The witnesses were duly crossexamined by the Ld. Counsel for accused persons.
52. From the evidence discussed above, it is clear that accused Ravinder Kumar was working in Accounts Department of RITES. He was the person Incharge and responsible for dealing with payments of GSLI. He used to initiate the process of payment, feed data in FMIS as well as prepare payment vouchers and cheques. Evidence as discussed above shows that he opted option '3' meant for making payment to other persons and manipulated the payments meant for beneficiaries of RITES and diverted the funds of RITES to his accounts and well as accounts his brother Rajesh Kumar Sharma. Evidence of the bank officials shows that amount from the account of A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 19 of 40 RITES was transferred to the accounts of the accused persons.
53. More specifically, PW2 Sh.Krishan Kumar Kapoor, AGM(Finance) RITES and PW6 Sh.Sunil Khurana, Manager(Finance) have stated F&A Division of RITES handles all the financial transactions. Accused Ravinder Kumar was working in the Establishment Section of F&A Division and was handling all the matters relating to payments of advances to the staff from Provident Fund, receiving the PF contributions of staff and RITES into PF Trust account, investment of funds of rites PF Trust, payment of and accounting contribution of employees of RITES and employer to GSLI(Group Saving Linked Insurance Scheme) to LIC; receiving claims from LIC in respect of employees who retired, resigned and on death and corresponding payment of these claims were made to the employees or their nominees. He further stated that duties of accused Ravinder Kumar remained same irrespective of post held by him for a period of more than 10 years and during said period all relevant records pertaining to abovesaid duties remained in establishment section of F&A Division in the custody of dealing official i.e. accused Ravinder Kumar. He further deposed that accused Ravinder Kumar was responsible for processing the payment; preparing bank cheque payment vouchers for release of payment in the name of beneficiaries; entering data into Financial Management Information System(FMIS); printing the cheques in the name of beneficiaries; putting the cheques before authorized signatories and thereafter cheques were handed over A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 20 of 40 to accused Ravinder Kumar for further action.
54. PW5 Mrs.M.Ahuwalia,Manager (Accounts), RITES has stated that accused Ravinder Kumar was Desk Officer and responsible for ensuring that payments in respect of GSLI claims were received from LIC. He deposed that payment vouchers were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar.
55. PW7 Sh. R.S.Bhatnagar, PW9 Anil Ghai and PW11 Sh. J.S.Yadav Joint General Manager (Finance) deposed that GSLI payment vouchers used to be prepared by concerned dealing/Desk Official i.e. accused Ravinder Kumar and he was to send the same to beneficiaries. PW12 Ms.Manjula S.Rao stated that cheque Ex.PW6/B is in the name of R.K.Sharma. She stated that all payment vouchers pertaining to payment of GSLI claims used to be prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. After she signed the cheques, same along with vouchers were returned to the Banking Section.
56. PW13 Sh. Subhash Chander Chhabra has also deposed that all the payments vouchers pertaining to payment of GSLI claims used to be prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar and responsibility of the cheque signing authority was only to check the payee's name, amount of cheque, cheque number and date of cheque.
57. PW14 Sh.V.S.Kalra submitted a list of cheques payments made on behalf of RITES in respect of which corresponding payments were not received from LIC relating to GSLI. He has also proved cheques in favour of R.K.Sharma. As per prevalent practice, A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 21 of 40 there was no need to verify the documents and it was responsibility of the person preparing the voucher and the person checking the voucher as all records remained with them. PW18 further stated that on the basis of verification, details and confirmations received from Axis Bank, some facts relating to fraudulent payments pertaining to GSLI were noticed during the period from 04.02.2004 to 04.06.2008. Total 20 fraudulent cheque payments pertaining to GSLI totaling to Rs.10,25,789/ were noticed in respect of which accused Ravinder Kumar prepared all the bank cheque payment vouchers by entering data into FMIS of RITES, through which all the fraudulent cheques were printed. He further stated that 11 cheques were printed through which funds of RITES were diverted to the account of accused Ravinder Kumar maintained with Axis Bank; accused Ravinder Kumar had prepared all the said 11 bank cheque payment vouchers through which cheques were printed in the beneficiary name of accused R.K.Suharma.
58. PW18 further stated that 3 cheques were also printed in the beneficiary name of Rajesh Kumar and funds of RITES Ltd. were credited to the account of Sh. Rajesh Kumar maintained with Punjab & Sindh Bank. One cheque was also credited to the account of Rajesh Kumar. Two cheques in the name of Rajesh Kumar were credited to the account of Rajesh Kumar maintained with HDFC Bank. Two cheques in the name of Rajesh Kumar were transferred to the account of Rajesh Kumar maintained with Canara Bank. One another A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 22 of 40 cheque was credited to joint account of accused Ravinder Kumar and his wife Bala Devi maintained with Axis Bank. PW18 stated that all the bank cheque payment vouchers through which above cheques were printed, were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. All the aforesaid funds of RITES Ltd. were diverted to the accounts of accused Ravinder Kumar and Rajesh Kumar maintained in different banks. He has identified both the accused persons.
59. PW22 Sh.Shyam Sunder Bhatia, who was working in F&A Division of RITES stated that payment vouchers pertaining to GSLI payments were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar and cheques for these vouchers were also prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. PW23 Smt.Rita Handa has stated that during the period from 2004 to 2008, no documented procedure for payment of GSLI dues was available in RITES. She has stated that as per practice, the documents received from P&A Division as well as GSLI Register being maintained by then dealing officer i.e. Ravinder Kumar were retained by him only and were not submitted with the voucher at the time of putting up the same to the cheque signatories.
60. PW28 Sh.K.N.Aggarwal has stated that accused Ravinder Kumar was responsible for processing payment towards GSLI in case of retired employees/death cases, preparing vouchers and putting up the same for payment and to ensure that payments towards GSLI received from LIC and further proceeding for payment to retired employees or to their nominees. He has stated that Bank Vouchers A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 23 of 40 were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar.
61. PW29 Sh. Atma Prasad Dubey has stated vouchers and cheques were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. These cheques were received by accused Ravinder. All the said cheques were handed over to accused Ravinder Kumar for making payment to concerned payees through dispatch from Dispatch Section.
62. PW33 Sh. Nav Kishore Sahoo, Programmer of RITES has stated that during internal investigation carried out by F&A Division of RITES, he was asked to give reprint of the voucher No.8582 dated 31.03.2005; he gave the print out, which contains the name of Smt. Bala Devi as one of the payee and this voucher was prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar by using his access code and password by choosing option '3'. PW33 further stated that all the vouchers pertaining to GSLI payments were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar including the payment vouchers. The staff of Banking Division can not, in any way, alter the contents of the data.
63. PW4 Sh.Mani Shankar, Senior Manager of Axis Bank has stated that accused Ravinder Kumar and his wife Bala Devi maintained joint account at its branch at Barakhamba Road, Delhi and as per statement of account funds from RITES account was transferred to this account. PW26 Sh.Vivek Kumar Varshney, Sr.Manager Axis Bank has stated cheque for Rs.2,98,142/ was credited to the account of Ravinder Kumar and Smt Mala Devi.
64. PW10 Sh.Ram Parsad Jain, Officer of Punjab & Sind A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 24 of 40 Bank, Naya Bazar, Delhi states that accused Rajesh Kumar maintains A/C No. 10817 and as per statement of account Ex.PW10/B, clearing cheques for Rs.21,986/, Rs.49,816 and Rs.44,833/ were credited to this account from the account of RITES.
65. PW6 Sh. Prabhat Kumar, Officer, Canara Bank, Uttam Nagar Branch has stated that Rajesh Kumar Sharma had account No. 2379101012826 and as per statement of account Ex.PW16/J, cheques for Rs.45,678/ and 61,856/ were credited to this account.
66. PW19 Sh Sikander Baig, Assistant Manager, HDFC Bank, Chandni Chowk, Delhi has stated that Rajesh Kumar has account No.02171000037246 and account No.02171600001375 and the certain funds of RITES were transferred to these accounts. Arguments on behalf of CBI
67. Ld. PP for the CBI has submitted that accused Ravinder Kumar committed fraud while being employed in the RITES as Jr.Account Manager and diverted the funds to his accounts, as well as account of his brother Rajesh Kumar. It is further submitted that accused Ravinder Kumar used to receive payments from the LIC under GSLI; process the payments to the beneficiaries; he used to feed data in FMIS; generate vouchers and cheques; getting the same signed from authorized signatories and thereafter transferred/diverted the same either to his own accounts as well as to account of his brother accused Rajesh Kumar Sharma. It is submitted that accused Ravinder A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 25 of 40 Kumar fraudulently diverted the funds of RITES to his account as well as to his brother Rajesh Kumar Sharma and thus caused loss to RITES. Since, accused Ravinder Kumar has been dismissed, there was no need for sanction for prosecution of the accused. Arguments on behalf of accused persons
68. Ld. Counsel for the accused has submitted that sanction is faulty; RITES Balance Sheet does not show that any fraud had taken place and same is proved by testimony of DW1; accused Ravinder Kumar was working under supervision of his superior officers, who were also in league with accused; ACR of 3 years of accused was written in one year; payment has been made to all the claimants; no loss has been caused to the organization; no disclosure has been recorded by the Investigating Officer; all the witnesses listed in the list of witnesses have not been examined. It is further submitted that 90% of witnesses are the same in another case also. In this case, all the bank statements are photocopies of the original lying in connected case; but photocopies can not be relied upon. It is submitted that disclosure statement of the accused has not been filed in Court and and held back by the CBI as accused had named higher officials of RITES. IO of the another case is a witness in this case and he had handed over documents to the IO of this case. It has put the extra pressure on the accused. It is further submitted that investigation is defective as the witnesses were examined after J.C. remand was over and all the witnesses, who were relevant, were not examined.
A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 26 of 4069. PW1 Sh.Mohan Lal Gautam, Manager (P&A), RITES Ltd. has testified that a disciplinary enquiry was conducted against accused Ravinder Kumar and on the basis of enquiry, he was dismissed from service vide Dismissal order Ex.PW1/B. Since accused Ravinder Kumar has been dismissed in the present case, there was no requirement for sanction for prosecution of the accused.
70. It has been further contended on behalf of accused persons that balance sheet of RITES does not show that any fraud had taken place, which creates a dent on the theory put forth by the CBI.
71. DW1 Sh. Pramod Kapur has been examined on behalf of accused persons. He has stated that he is partner of M/s J.L.Garg & Company, CA firm( KMGS & Associates), who were the statutory auditors of M/s RITES Ltd for the financial year ending 31.03.2004. During the course of their assignment, they had examined and audited the books of accounts of M/s RITES Ltd. including the transactions relating to Provident Fund and Group Savings Linked Insurance (GSLI). No fraud was detected in both the schemes till 3.03.2004. In his cross examination, he has stated that if any reconciliation had not taken place or any fraud had taken place, which was to be detected at internal audit level, the same having no bearing on the overall Profit & Loss account of M/s RITES Ltd., the same could not be detected during the course of their statutory audit.
72. This evidence does not help the accused persons as fraud in the present case was committed from 2004 to 2008 and DW1 A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 27 of 40 was Auditor for the year 2004 only. Moreover, in his cross examination, DW1 has stated that if reconciliation had not taken place, then fraud could not be detected. Hence, there is no force in the contention of accused persons.
73. Though the prosecution witnesses were crossexamined on behalf of accused persons, yet testimony of these witnesses remained unshaken. Nothing was put to these witnesses as to how accused Ravinder had been acting on asking of his superior officers. Nothing was disclosed as to who were in connivance with the accused persons. In the absence of the same, it can not be said that accused Ravinder Kumar committed fraud on the asking of any higher officers of RITES. Had it been so, the funds could have been diverted to the accounts of such officers or their relatives but no such instance has been pointed out by the accused. Hence, there is no force in the contention that accused Ravinder Kumar that he committed fraud on asking of any of his officers.
74. It is further contended that ACR of 3 years of accused Ravinder Kumar were written in one year; all the witnesses listed in the list of witnesses have not been examined and no disclosure statement has been placed on record by the CBI. It is further contended that payment has been made to all the claimants; no loss has been caused to the organization and balance sheet of RITES does not show that any fraud had taken place.
75. Recording of 3 ACRs in one go, is an administrative A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 28 of 40 lapse and in no way it affects the the present case against the accused Ravinder Kumar. CBI is the master of its own case and it is prerogative of the CBI as to whom to examine and whom not to be examined. If certain witnesses named in the list of witnesses have not been examined by the CBI, accused could have examined them in defence witnesses. However, accused persons did not prefer to examine them in defence evidence. As regards, nonrecording or non placing of disclosure statement is concerned, there is no law which mandates the recording of disclosure statement in each and every case. Hence, nonrecording of disclosure statement and examination of all the witnesses named in the list of witnesses are not fatal to the case of CBI. Moreover as discussed above, it can not be said that accused Ravinder was acting on the instructions of superiors and committed fraud in connivance with them. Evidence as discussed above, it can not be said that no loss has been occasioned to the RITES.
76. It is further submitted that IO of another case is also a witness in this case, which puts extra pressure on the accused persons. It is further submitted that only photocopies of the documents have been proved in this case.
77. No law has been brought to the notice of this Court that IO of one case can not be made a witness in another matter. Both the matters pertain to fraud in CPF funds and GSLI Funds of RITES, one and the same organisation. Being the IO of another case, he is supposed to be acquainted with the facts of the present case and had A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 29 of 40 actively participated in the investigation of the present case. I am of the view that there is nothing wrong in citing and examining Inspector Pramod Kumar(PW36) in the present case and accused do not deserve any benefit on this count.
78. Second limb of argument is that photocopies of certain vouchers and cheques have been proved in the present case. It is not in dispute another case with regard to fraud in RITES Ltd. is pending with this case in the same Court. Original of certain vouchers and cheques have been filed in the said case. File of the said case was available with the court while exhibiting photocopies of such documents and while writing the judgment. If there is only one set of original documents and two or more cases pertaining to those documents are pending, it is not possible to produce and prove original documents in all those cases. Hence, objection of Ld. Counsel for the accused persons is not tenable that certain photocopies have been exhibited in the present case.
79. PW23 Rita Handa has stated that during the period 20042008, no documented procedure for GSLI disbursement existed. On cessation of employment(Death, Retirement and Resignation etc.) of an individual employee, Personnel & Administration Division used to prefer a claim to LIC and then LIC made payments in favour RITES Ltd. After receiving payments from LIC, payments cheques were sent to Finance & Accounts Division for deposit in RITES account along with details of employees in whose favour corresponding payments A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 30 of 40 were to be made. The dealing officer in the accounts after receipt of payments from the LIC used to deposit the same in account of RITES; prepare cheque payment vouchers, which were checked by the authorized signatories; thereafter vouchers were sent to the Banking Division for printing cheques and obtaining signatures of authorized signatories thereon and for onward remittance to the beneficiaries. It was the responsibility of the person preparing vouchers and cheques that payments were received from the LIC and payment was made to the beneficiaries. It has come in evidence that accused Ravinder Kumar had prepared Bank cheque payment vouchers through Financial Management Information System(FMIS) of RITES Ltd. using his personal access code and option '3'; he entered in the FMIS fictitious payee names of R.K.Sharma, Rajesh Kumar/Rajesh Kumar Sharma and Smt. Bala Devi during the period 04.02.2004 to 04.06.2008 against which 20 cheques towards GSLI payments were made. It has also come in evidence that internal verification was carried out in RITES and it was revealed that no payment was received from LIC regarding GSLI claims in respect of 20 cheques. Sh. Y.P.Johar(PW3), AGM (Admn.) has confirmed that there were no regular employees of RITES in the name of Sh.R.K.Sharma S/o Shimbhu Dayal or Sh.Rajesh Kumar S/o Shimbhu Dayal, or Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal during the period 04.02.2004 to 04.06.2008 to be eligible for payment of any GSLI claim. He issued letter Ex.PW3/A to the CBI in this regard.
A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 31 of 4080. Sh. Sunil Khurana (PW6), Mrs. M.Ahluwalia (PW5), R.S.Bhatnagar (PW7), Sh. Akhil Narain Bhatnagar (PW8) and Sh.K.N.Aggarwal (PW28) have confirmed that bank cheque payments vouchers were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar and put up to them for checking and that these vouchers bear signatures of accused Ravinder Kumar. Thereafter, these vouchers were sent to Banking Section for printing of cheques. PWs Mrs. Manjula S.Rao, Sh. Anil Ghai, Sh. J.S.Yadav, Sh. Sanjeev Rai Sh. K.K.Kapoor, Sh. S.C.Chhabra and Sh. K.N.Aggarwal have stated that they signed the cheques and returned the same to the Banking Section for further action. It has come in evidence that after cheques were signed by authorized signatories, same were handed over to accused Ravinder Kumar for dispatch. It has also come in evidence that all the payment vouchers (original of which were missing) were prepared by accused Ravinder Kumar. As per evidence, it has surfaced that accused Ravinder Kumar is beneficiary of fraudulent encashment of 11 GSLI Cheques amounting to Rs.3,60,541/ prepared in the name of Sh. R.K.Sharma as deposed by Sh.Vivek Varshney Manager of Axis Bank, DLF City Branch Gurgaon as he stated that a sum of Rs.3,60,541/ was credited to saving bank account No. 131010100006262 in the name of accused Ravinder Kumar. It has also come in evidence that accused Ravinder Kumar is also beneficiary of one more GSLI cheque prepared by him in the name of his wife Smt. Bala Devi for a sum of Rs.2,98,142/ and payment of A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 32 of 40 this cheque was credited to the joint account of accused Ravinder Kumar and his wife in A/C No. 007010100048374 maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., Barakhamba Road. These cheques were debited to the current account No. 131010200000569 of RITES Ltd. maintained with the same branch.
81. It has also come in evidence that accused Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar Sharma is beneficiary of 8 GSLI cheques amounting to Rs.3,67,106/, credited to his Bank account maintained with Punjab & Sindh Bank, Naya Bazar, HDFC Bank, Chandni Chowk Branch, where he has two accounts and Canara Bank, Uttam Nagar Branch. It has also come in evidence that these 8 cheques were debited to the current account No. 131010200000569 of RITES Ltd. Maintained with Axis Bank, DLF City Branch, Gurgaon.
82. From the evidence as discussed above, it stands proved on record that accused Ravinder Kumar fraudulently and dishonestly withdrew the funds of RITES Ltd by preparing bank cheqe payment vouchers through FMIS of RITES Ltd, using his personal access code and 'option 3' entering fictitious payee names of Sh. R.K.Sharma (similar to his own name), Sh. Rajesh Kumar @ Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma (name similar to his brother Rajesh Kumar Sharma) and Smt. Bala Devi (similar to his wife name) and payment of 20 fraudulent cheques were made to their account and he in conspiracy with his brother caused a total loss of Rs.10,25,789/ to A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 33 of 40 RITES Ltd. Accused Ravinder committed the fraud while he was acting a public servant.
83. In view of above discussion, I hold that there existed a criminal conspiracy between accused Ravinder Kumar and Rajesh Kumar Sharma. In furtherance of said conspiracy, accused Ravinder Kumar, being posted as a public servant in RITES, committed forgery on the various documents such as vouchers and cheques and diverted the funds drawn from LIC on account of GSLI in the banks of RITES to his own accounts as well as accounts of his brother accused Rajesh Kumar Sharma. Hence, CBI has succeeded in proving its case against both the accused persons under Sections 120B IPC read with Sections 420/467/468/471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and substantive offences thereof against accused Ravinder Kumar. Both the accused Ravinder Kumar and Rajesh Kumar Sharma are accordingly convicted.
Announced in the open Court ( TALWANT SINGH )
Dated: 29.11.2016 District & Sessions Judge (East)
Karkardooma Courts : Delhi
A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 34 of 40
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TALWANT SINGH
DISTRICT& SESSIONS JUDGE (EAST)
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
A.C.No.54/2016
FIR/RC No. DAI 2011 A 0010
CNR No:DLKA010011562011
Under Sections 120B IPC read with
Section 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section
under Section 13(2) read with Section
13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Central Bureau of Investigation
versus
1. Sh.Ravinder Kumar
S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal
R/o B2/302, Sunny Valley,
CGHS, Plot No.27, Sector12,
Dwarka, Delhi.
2. Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Rajesh Kumar
S/o Sh.Shimbhu Dayal
R/o H.No.400, Ward No.34,
Janta Colony, Rohtak, Haryana. ...Accused persons
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Vide judgment dated 29.11.2015, both the convicts, namely, Sh.Ravinder Kumar and Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Rajesh A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 35 of 40 Kumar have been held guilty and convicted for commission of offences punishable under Section 120B of Indian Penal Code read with Sections 420/467/468/471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, whereas convict Ravinder Kumar has also been convicted for substantive offences thereof.
2 I have heard Sh.M.Saraswat, Ld. PP for the CBI and Ld. Counsel for convicts on the quantum of sentence. 3 The learned PP for the CBI has submitted that at the convict Ravinder Kumar was working as Junior Manager in the Accounts Section of RITES Ltd and while so working, he connived with his brother coaccused Rajesh Kumar Sharma and fraudulently withdrew the funds of GSLI run by LIC and RITES Ltd. and diverted the same to his accounts as well as to the accounts of his brother co accused Rajesh Kumar Sharma on the basis of forged documents prepared by him. The funds diverted to the accounts of the convicts were misappropriated by them. He has further argued that convict Ravinder Kumar, being public servant, misused his official position. He has further submitted that the convicts may be awarded maximum punishment prescribed under the law.
4 The Ld. Counsel for both the convicts has submitted that convict Ravinder Kumar is middle aged person, having family consisting of college going children; he is the sole bread earner; he is not a previous convict and his antecedents are clean. On behalf of A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 36 of 40 convict Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Rajesh Kumar, it is submitted that he is a victim of circumstances and funds were diverted to his accounts without his knowledge. He is only bread earner of his family he is having responsibility of a family consisting of a wife and school going children. It is submitted that a lenient view may be taken, while awarding sentence to the convicts.
5 Wide spread corruption amongst the public servants has to be curbed with a strong hand by all concerned including courts of law, in as much as corruption affects not only the moral fibre of the society but the economic stability and progress of country as well. Corruption in a civilized society is a disease like cancer, if not detected in time, is sure to maliganise the polity of the country leading to disastrous consequences. Corruption is opposed to democracy and social order, being not only antipeople, but aimed and targeted against them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage. Unless nibbed in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence - shaking of the socioeconomicpolitical system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society. 6 Corruption by public servants has become a gigantic problem. It has spread everywhere and no facet of public activity has been left unaffected by the sting of corruption. It has deep and pervasive impact on the functioning of the entire country and large scale corruption retards the national building activities and everyone has to suffer on that count. Corruption is corroding like cancerous A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 37 of 40 lymph nodes, the vital veins of the body politics, social fabric of efficiency in the public service and demoralising the honest officers. The efficiency in public service would improve only when the public servant devotes his sincere attention and does his duty diligently, truthfully, honestly and devotes himself assiduously to the performance of his duty to the post.
7 In the present case, convict Ravinder Kumar has diverted a sum of about Rs.6.60 Lacs to his accounts, whereas an amount of Rs.3.70 Lacs was diverted to the accounts of coconvict Rajesh Kumar Sharma. In all total amount of Rs.10.26 Lacs was fraudulently withdrawn from the accounts of GSI run by LIC and RITES Ltd and misappropriated by the convicts. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances, convicts are sentenced as under :
(i)Convict Rajesh Kumar Sharma is awarded sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.4,00,000/ (Rupees Four Lacs) for the offence punishable under section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 420/467/468/471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)
(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
(ii) Convict Ravinder Kumar is awarded sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000/ (Rupees One Lac) for the offence punishable under section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 420/467/468/471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)
(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 38 of 40 imprisonment for 6 months.
(iii) Convict Ravinder Kumar is also awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,00,000/ for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
(iv) Convict Ravinder Kumar is also awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000/ for the offence punishable under Section 467 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
(v) Convict Ravinder Kumar is also awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000/ for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
(vi) Convict Ravinder Kumar is also awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000/ for the offence punishable under Section 471 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
(vii) Convict Ravinder Kumar is also awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000/ for the offence punishable Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
7 All the sentences awarded to convict Ravinder Kumar shall run concurrently. The convicts shall be entitled for the benefit of A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 39 of 40 the provision of Section 428 Cr.PC. Copies of judgment and order on sentence be given free of cost to the convicts.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court ( TALWANT SINGH )
Dated: 26.12.2016 District & Sessions Judge (East)
Special Judge (CBI)
Karkardooma Courts : Delhi
A.C.No.54/16 CBI vs. Ravinder Kr. etc. Page 40 of 40