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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 3086

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
C. Sasidharan Nair – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. Appeal Nos. 423, 458, 470, 471 of 2016
Decided On : 24-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Suman Chakravarthy
For the Respondents: Rajesh A., Rekha S.

Public servants convicted of misappropriation and forgery through forged loan applications must be proven to have made false documents and abused their positions, affirming the importance of direct evidence in establishing involvement in such conspiracies.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d), 13(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B - Criminal conspiracy, forgery, and misappropriation of funds by public servants - Accused were convicted of misappropriating Rs.30,000/- and Rs.50,000/- through forged loan applications based on fixed deposits, engaging in a criminal conspiracy with co-accused and abusing their positions. (Paras 3, 35, 46)

(B) Evidence - Legal standard - The prosecution must establish the making and use of a forged document for securing loans; mere participation in forgery or conspiratorial acts is insufficient without proven direct involvement. (Paras 7, 30)

Facts of the case:
The accused, public servants at a co-operative bank, misappropriated amounts by forging signatures on loan applications, leading to undue financial gain at the bank’s expense.

Findings of Court:
The Special Court confirmed the finding of guilt and imposed sentences of simple imprisonment of one year for offenses under the PC Act and six months for IPC offenses, to run concurrently.

Issues: Whether the Special Court erred in its findings on the commission of forgery and conspiracy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court identified the connection between the accused, the forged documents, and their misuse in the fraudulent loan application process as established by the evidence.

Result: Appeals dismissed, conviction and sentence affirmed.

Table of Content
1. overview of appeals and jurisdiction. (Para 1)
2. details of allegations against accused. (Para 3 , 4)
3. trial details and convictions. (Para 5 , 6)
4. key arguments from the defense. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
5. prosecution's stance and support for verdict. (Para 12)
6. court's evidentiary findings. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
7. discussion of financial misconduct. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
8. authentication of loan applications. (Para 21 , 22)
9. role of the bank officials and processes. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)
10. forensic evidence on forged documents. (Para 28 , 29)
11. circumstantial evidence linking accused to forgery. (Para 30 , 31)
12. custodianship and procedural violations. (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
13. conclusiveness of conspiracy and misconduct. (Para 35 , 36)
14. essentials for proving forgery. (Para 37 , 38 , 39)
15. legal standards set by case law on forgery. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44)
16. court's final decision on convictions. (Para 45)
17. conclusion and directive for compliance. (Para 46 , 47 , 48)

JUDGMENT :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

1. These criminal appeals have been filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’ for short). Crl.A. Nos.423/2016 & 458/2016 have been filed at the instance of one Sri.C.Sasidharan Nair, who is accused No.2, and Crl.A. Nos.470/2016 & 471/2016 have been filed at the instance of one Sri.Sasikumar, who is accused No.1, in C.C. Nos.30/2009 & 32/2009 on the files of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram (hereinafter referred to as ‘Special Court’ for short) challenging the verdict of conviction and sentence dated 28.04.2016 in the above cases. The sole respondent in all these appeals is the State of Kerala represented by VACB. C.C. Nos.30/2009 & 32/2009 were jointly tried by the learned Special Judge and rendered a common verdict on 28.04.2016.

2. Heard Adv.Suman Chakravarthy, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused No.2 in Crl.A. Nos.423/2016 and 458/2016 and Sri.Ananth Krishna K.S. who was appointed as State Brief for the appellant/accused No.1 in Crl.A. Nos.470/2016 & 471/2016, since the counsel who filed these appeals had relinquished his engagement, as well as the learned Special Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the common verdict impugned and the records of the Special Court.

3. The prosecution case in C.C. No.30/2009 is that the first and second accused being public servants, employed as Secretary and Senior Clerk respectively in Thiruvananthapuram Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.T-131, Head Office Branch, Thiruvananthapuram during the period from 19th December 1994 and 7th January 1995 hatched criminal conspiracy along with P.K. Manoharan (no more) and G.Sreekumari who were working as Clerk and Assistant Secretary respectively in the aforesaid Co-operative Bank during the same period and thereby abused their official position and misappropriated amounts from the Bank. It is alleged that in pursuance of the above referred conspiracy, accused dishonestly and fraudulently misappropriated an amount of Rs.30,000/-, that is, Rs.10,000/- on 19.12.1994 by availing secured loan No.280 and Rs.10,000/- each on 07.01.1995 by availing secured loan Nos. 287 and 288 on the security of the Fixed Deposit (FD) No.173/94-95 deposited in the name of one Mr.S.R.Anilkumar by forging the signatures of the above said depositor in the loan application forms, loan bonds, loan vouchers etc. without the knowledge or consent of the depositor, and used such forged documents as genuine for availing the said loans and after that the accused persons released the total amount covered by the above referred Fixed Deposit to the depositor with interest without realizing the loan amount, which resulted the loan amount in secured loan Nos. 280 and 287 to be outstanding and thereby cheated the Bank and obtained undue pecuniary advantage to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and thereby committed the offences under Section 13 (1)(c) and (d) read with

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