IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in conspiracy and forgery cases, and any reasonable doubt entitles the accused to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

(P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.)

The Special Judge (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam tried accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.5 of 2004 on a charge for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act), and Sections 120B, 420 , 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ). Separate charges were framed. After trial, the Special Court acquitted the 1^st accused and convicted accused Nos.2 to 4 as follows:

3. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the 4^th accused filed Crl.Appeal No.1406 of 2006 and accused Nos.2 and 3 filed Crl.Appeal No.1408 of 2006 under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).

4. Heard the learned counsel for the respective appellants and the learned Standing Counsel for the CBI.

5. The case of the prosecution is as follows:

The 1st accused was the Manager of Canara Bank, Sasthamangalam Branch, Thiruvananthapuram and as such a public servant. The 2^nd accused availed a car loan from the said bank under the “Canmobile” scheme, without actually purchasing the car. The accused had hatched a conspiracy to effectuate that plan. A concern namely, “South East Automobiles, Feroke P.O., Calicut”, was falsely created by the 4^th accused and in the name of such a fictitious company, invoice and advance payment receipt concerning sale of a Maruti Versa car in the name of the 2^nd accused were falsely created by accused Nos. 3 and 4. Based on such forged documents, a loan of Rs.4,99,988/- was sanctioned by the 1^st accused. The said amount was disbursed without inspecting the vehicle. 21 cheques issued in disbursal of the loan amount were cashed through the bank account opened in the Central Bank of India, Rishimangalam Branch, in the name of the said company and appropriated by the accused. Photocopies of the registration certificate and tax payment certificate in respect of a vehicle having Reg.No.KL-01-W-5401 were forged and produced in the bank to support the claim of the purchase. The said registration number, in fact, was of a motorcycle. After obtaining such illegal gain by committing forgery and cheating, the 2^nd accused stopped repayment of the loan amount. By such acts, the accused allegedly had committed the aforementioned offences.

6. The prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 20 and proved Exts.P1 to P54 to establish the charge framed against the accused. The appellants not only denied the incriminating circumstances appeared against them in evidence, but also submitted their defence in the respective statements during examination under Section 313 of the Code. On the side of the accused, Exts.D1 to D23 were proved and DWs.1 to 8 were examined. The Special Court, after considering the evidence that came on record found that the 1^st accused was not a party to the conspiracy. He was accordingly acquitted. The Special Court, however found that the evidence brought in by the prosecution was sufficient to prove creation of false documents, such as Exts.P4 and P5, which are the invoice and advance payment receipt in relation to the vehicle for which loan was availed in the name of the 2^nd accused. It was also found that the evidence was sufficient to establish the respective role of accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 in forging the documents and obtaining money from the bank illegally.

7. The learned counsel for accused Nos.2 and 3 harped more on the contentions in support of plea of innocence of the 3^rd accused. Of course, it is submitte