Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.B. SINHA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CYRIAC JOSEPH
Mir Nagvi Askari
Versus
C.B.I.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1477 OF 2004 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 1525, 1526 OF 2004, 5 AND 121 OF 2005
Decided on : 07-08-2009
[Para 39]
B. Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 120A and 120B - Criminal Conspiracy - Circumstantial Evidence to prove offence of criminal conspiracy – Accused officers of bank - Posted in funds branch dealing with funds management - Amount received from different banks by Andhra Bank - Credited to the account of accused number three - Nature of transactions and manner in which it has been transacted points finger to the involvement of official of bank - Ingredients of conspiracy established against officers of bank - Ultimate beneficiary was Hiten P. Dalal, Accused No. 3 - Banker's cheques in some cases not even received by Bank - Establish factum of conspiracy - Cheques not in physical possession of Bank – Prepration of credit and debit vouchers and entry in bank record establishes existence of said conspiracy.
[Paras 139 to 141, 205, 210, 212, 213]
C. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 13, 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 21 - Public Servant - Criminal Misconduct – Official posted in Nationalized bank – Falls within meaning of public servant - Amount received from different banks by Andhra Bank - Credited to the account of accused number three - Nature of transactions and manner in which it has been transacted points finger to the involvement of official of bank - A3 did not have over-draft facility and could not have overdrawn his account - Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 working in bank were guilty of offences under Section 13(1)(c), 13(2), 13(1)(d) – Accused 5 acquitted - No evidence proved his involvement in transaction.
[Paras 214 to 218, 220 and 222]
D. Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 405, 406, 407, 408 and 409 - Criminal Breach of Trust - Amount received from different banks by Andhra Bank - Credited to the account of accused number three - Nature of transactions and manner in which it has been transacted points finger to the involvement of official of bank - Dishonestly transfered money belonging to Bank in account of accused No. 3 - Resultantly, caused wrongful loss to bank – Accused 1, 2 and 4 guilty of breach of trust.
[Paras 242 to 247]
E. Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 463 and 464 - Forgery - Definition of "False document" is a part of definition of "forgery – Construction – Cardinal principle of - Both must be read together.
[Para 233]
F. Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 410 and 411 - Stolen Property – Receiver of - Conviction for the offence of – Conviction of principal offender - Not a per-requisile to convict receiver of stolen property.
[Paras 254, 256, 257, 259, 260 and 261]
Judgment :-
S.B. Sinha, J.
These five appeals, arising out of a judgment and order dated 19/10/2004 passed by the Special Court constituted under the Special Court (Trial and Offences related to Securities) Act, 1992 (for short "the Act"), were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
BACKGROUND FACTS
Andhra Bank is a Scheduled Nationalised Bank. It has a branch at Mumbai known as the Fort Branch. Out of five appellants before us, Accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 were officers of the said Branch of the Andhra Bank. Accused No. 1 was the Manager of Funds, Accused Nos. 2 and 4 were Junior Management Officers of the Funds Department, and Accused No. 5 was the Assistant Manager, Debit Section. Accused No.3, Hiten Dalal, was at all relevant times and still is a broker and, inter alia, deals in securities.
Accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5, in their capacity as public servants, were working in the Fort Branch of Andhra Bank.
They were charged with abuse of their position and acting dishonestly and fraudulently, as a result whereof undue pecuniary advantage is said to have been procured by Accused No. 3 by way of crediting bankers cheques without them having been presented or sent for clearance and, thus, cheating Andhra Bank and dishonestly permitting substantial withdrawals from his current account by the Accused No. 3. They are said to have prepared false documents and used them as genuine ones, with the intention to defraud and falsify entries in the books of accounts of the Bank. They are also charged with entering into the criminal conspiracy, as they, having been entrusted with the property of the Andhra Bank, prepared credit and debit vouchers in favour of Accused No. 3 authorizing credit of amounts of various cheques to the account of Accused No. 3 without having actually received any bankers cheques.
Indisputably, the Reserve Bank of India appointed a Committee known as the Jankiraman Committee whence the alleged security scam came to light. It submitted a report, a portion of which was marked as Exhibit 334 before the learned Special Judge wherein certain irregularities in the functions of Andhra Bank were pointed out, the relevant portion whereof reads as under:
"(6) It was observed on a scrutiny of the current account of H.P. Dalal that the branch has accommodated the broker by affording credit of some of the bankers cheques received from other banks to his account one working day prior to the day on which the instruments were sent for clearing, with a view to avoiding overdrawings in the account on these days. The funds so credited have been utilized by the broker either for purchase of securities or making some other payments. Instances noticed are given in the annexure. It will be seen therefrom that in the case of item No. (i) the branch had afforded the credit even before the actual date of the instrument."
(Emphasis added)
It was also pointed out how Accused No.3 had received financial benefit out of the said transactions.
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
Relying on, or on the basis of, the Jankiraman Committee Report, a First Information Report was lodged by PW-25 Sitaram Premaram Paladia on or about 02/06/1993 (Exhibit 333), initially against the accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
No further preliminary inquiry was conducted before lodging the said First Information Report. Ten instances of grant of credit to Accused No. 3 were detailed therein, in respect of the cheques received or those yet to be received from four banks, namely Bank of Karad, ANZ Grindlays Bank, Canara Bank and Standard Chartered Bank (hereinafter referred to as "the drawer banks"), without presenting or sending them for clearance.
PW-26 Mr. Waydande while making investigation into the said offence, allegedly found involvement of Accused Nos. 4 and 5 as well, who had prepared debit and credit vouchers, and made entries in the transfer scroll, BCR Registers, Cheque Clearing and Receiving Registers, etc. They were thereafter made accuse
Dr. Vimla v. Delhi Administration
Mohammad Usman Mohammad Hussain Maniyar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (1981) 2 SCC 443
Kehar Singh and Ors. v. State (Delhi Administration)
State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa (1996) 4 SCC 659
C. Chenga Reddy v. State of A.P.
Mohmed Amin @ Amin Choteli Rahim Miyan Shaikh and Anr. v. C.B.I. through its Director
Onkar Nath Mishra and Ors. vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.