SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Ker) 1432

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
K. VIJAYAKUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - Respondent
Crl.A. Nos. 1104, 1109, 1108, 1107, 1105 & 1106 of 2001
Decided on : 29-01-2016

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :K. Ramakumar (Sr.) and S.M. Prasanth, Advocates
For the Respondent: Rajesh Vijayan, Public Prosecutor

Headnote:

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1)(c) and 13(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 468, 471 and 409 - Misappropriate amount - Appeal against conviction - Contention of counsel for appellant that it is not possible for him alone to misappropriate amount and there are other persons also involved in the process and as such, he cannot be convicted for offence - Held, Merely because investigating officer had not arrayed all the persons responsible for the misappropriation as accused alone is not sufficient to exonerate the accused/appellant, if there are evidences to show that he is also responsible for the commission of the offence and it was done by him knowing that the documents were fabricated for the purpose of disbursing the amount in favour of wrong persons or nonexistent persons.

ORDER :

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

1. The sole accused in C.C. Nos. 55/2000, 58/2000, 59/2000, 60/2000, 61/2000 and 62/2000 is the appellant in the above cases. The accused was charge sheeted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Alappuzha in V.C.No. 7/1996 of VACB, Alappuzha alleging offences under sections 13(1)(c) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter referred to as 'the P.C. Act') and sections 468, 471 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that the accused in the above cases was working as Junior Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Alappuzha during the period from 24.11.1989 to 24.6.1991 and during that period, he had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 42,320/- by forging 23 vouchers showing the registration numbers and names of some persons, who were said to have registered under the Unemployment Assistance Scheme entrusted to him on 27.11.1990, 30.11.1990, 22.12.1990. 24.12.1990 and 20.2.1991, which amount was entrusted to him for the purpose of disbursement to the beneficiaries under the scheme and he had created those documents with fraudulent intention to misappropriate the amount and thereby he had committed the above said offences.

3. As there were complaints of irregularities in the disbursement of the amount under the Unemployment Assistance Scheme effected during the period 1990-1991 in the office of Alappzuha District Employment Exchange, the District Employment Officer, PW1, was directed to conduct audit in respect of the same. He conducted audit relating to disbursement of the amount under the said scheme during that period. He had only conducted a random inspection during the period of his audit from 24.11.1992 to 28.11.1992 and found that by forged 23 vouchers in the names of fictitious persons with some false addresses and registration numbers, a sum of Rs. 42,320/- was misappropriated and it was also found that this was done by the accused and the concerned section clerk and others and submitted Ext P1 report which was forwarded to the Vigilance Department, on the basis of which, a vigilance enquiry was conducted and on the basis of the vigilance report, Ext.P77 First Information Report was registered as Crime No. 7/1996/VACB, Alappuzha by PW58 against the present accused, Pws4, 7, 14 and 13 and Mariyumma (the then Junior Superintendent) alleging offences under section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(2) of the P.C. Act and sections 468, 471 and 409 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Investigation in this case was conducted by PW59. He questioned the witnesses and recorded their statements. He seized Ext.P3 series vouchers as per Ext.P41 inventory. He had seized Exts.P21 to P24 and P31 registers as per Ext.P41 inventory. He had seized Ext.P25 and 26 attendance registers as per Ext.P78 inventory. He had seized Exts.P29 postal cover addressed to Sri. P. Soman, P30 postal cover addressed to Sri. K. Ramachandra Prasad, P32 postal cover addressed to Sri. K.V. Gopalakrishnan, P33 postal cover addressed to Sri.K. Ramachandra Babu, P34 postal cover addressed to Sri. K.P. M. Thomas, P35 postal cover addressed to Sri. K. Bhanumathi, P36 postal cover addressed to Smt. S. Ambika Devi, P37 postal cover addressed to Sri.C. Prasad, P38 postal cover addressed to Sri. P. Venugopal, Ext.P39 postal cover addressed to Sri. K.V. Satheesan, P47 postal cover addressed to Smt. M.K. Kamalamma, P48 postal cover addressed to Sri. K.P. Raveendran, P49 postal cover addressed to Smt. K.P. Leelamani, P50 postal cover addressed to Sri. P.Sudhakaran, P51 postal cover addressed to Sri.Sudhakaran Achari, P52 postal cover addressed to Smt. Soubhagyavathi, P53 postal cover addressed to Sri.Harikumar, P54 postal cover addressed to Sri.B. Chandrahasan, P55 postal cover addressed to Sri. A. Rajasekharan, P56 postal cover addressed to Sri.K. Venugopal, P57 postal cover addressed to Sri. K. Ramachandra Prasad and P

























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top