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

2004 Supreme(Mad) 564

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR
State - Appellant
Versus
K.Kalimuthu - Respondents
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 1215 of 2001 and Crl.M.P.Nos. 8117 and 8677 of 2001
Decided On : 31 March 2004

Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioner:N.Ranganathan, Spl.P.P.,for CBI cases. For The Respondent:P.Thiagarajan, Advocate.

Acts done by public servant not in course of official duty as such no sanction is required for prosecution.

Headnote:Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947-Section 16(1), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 197-Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section-Section 197-Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 420, 419, 467, 477A, 161 and 165A-Public Servant-Sanction for prosecution for offence of conspiracy, fabrication of false record mis appropriation of public funds-mis appropriation of public funds and misuse of official capacity-Held, Acts not done in the course of official duty-moreover, at the time of taking cognizance public servant ceased to be a public servant-No sanction for prosecution is necessary.

Judgment :-

This revision has been filed against the order of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai made in Crl.M.P.No:346 of 2001 in C.C.No.22 of 1997, dated 18.7.2001.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

The petitioner-police filed a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., against the respondent/accused No.24 and 31 others Under Sections 120 B IPC r/w Sections 420, 419, 467, 471, 477-A, 161 and 165-A IPC and Section 5(2) r/w 5(1)(a) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the allegation that the accused entered into a criminal conspiracy between march, 1983 and June 1984 at Madras, Gwalior and other places to commit offences of cheating, cheating by personation, forgery of valuable securities using the forged documents as genuine knowing them to be forged, falsification of accounts and criminal misconduct and in pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy K.Kalimuthu/A-24 informed the officers of eight different Nationalised Banks of the availability of huge surplus funds with the Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board that was functioning under his control and that the same can be converted into short term deposits in their Banks if they were prepared to sanction loans to Robin Mayne/A-1 and his friends for purchase of second hand lorries, while the banks so contacted agreed, Robin Mayne/A-1 himself collected cheques from the Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board and deposited the same with ten different branches of eight Nationalized Banks and in turn he and his friends availed loans to the tune of about Rs.56 lakhs for alleged purchase of second hand lorries and to substantiate their claims of having purchased lorries, produced false and forged R.C.Books, No Objection Certificates, Valuation Certificates and Sellers' receipts after changing the number plates of the vehicles and thus A-24 abetted the offences of impersonation by the other accused, and R.Manickam/A-25, P.A., to K.Kalimuthu/A-24 telephoned to the manager, Syndicate Bank Extension Court, Fort St.George, Chennai that A-24 was keen on meeting him and after the Manager met A-24 in his office, Robin Mayne/A-1 and P.R.T.Sooriya Kumar/A-2 were introduced as Robin Mayne and "Arumugam" suppressing the fact that Arumugam was P.R.T.Sooriya Kumar inside the Room of A.25, R.Manickam. Thus A.1 to A.25 cheated eight Nationalised banks to the tune of Rs.56 lakhs and obtained corresponding wrongful gain for themselves.

3. After the Police Report was filed five accused absconded and two accused died. Therefore the case was split against 25 accused persons who were attending the court. A-7, B.Bhujangan filed Crl.O.P.No.6223 of 1999 before this court and this court by order dated 5.12.200 directed the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai to dispose of the case not later than 30.9.2001.

4. Charges were framed against twenty five accused including respondent/accused No.24 on 2.3.2001 by the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases U/s.120B IPC r/w Sections 420, 419, 467, 471, 477-A, 161 and 165-A IPC and Section 5(2) r/w 5(1)(a) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

5. The following three charges were framed against the respondent/A-24:-

Charge No:1: Section 120B IPC r/w Sections 420, 419, 467, 471, 477-A, 161 and 165-A IPC and Section 5(2) r/w 5(1)(a) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

Charge No:41: Section 109 IPC r/w 420, 419, 467, 468 and 471 IPC

Charge No:184: Section 5(2)r/w 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

6. The witnesses were summoned for examination on 19.4.2001, 8.5.2001, 25.5.2001 and 25.6.2001, they were not examined by the Special court for CBI Cases. On 19.4.2001, this respondent/A-24 filed Crl.M.P.No:346 of 2001 before the trial court for discharging him on the ground that at the relevant period, the respondent was a Minister for Agriculture in Government of Tamil Nadu and there is a direct nexus and relationship between the discharge of his official duties and the offences alleged































































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top