The judgment establishes the legal principle that forgery, impersonation, and fraudulent loan transactions are punishable under the PC Act, 1988.

1. These appeals are preferred against the judgment of the trial Court dated 19.05.2009 made in C.C.No.63 of 2004 passed by Learned XI Additional Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai,

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case:

One Dakshinamurthy[A4] carrying on business in consumable items and cosmetics at No.33, SV Koil Street, Tambaram-Sanatorium, Chennai45, had applied for loan on 20.02.2000 with Corporation bank, Sanatorium Branch, Tambaram. A1[J.S.Prabhu] being a Branch Manager, had sanctioned the loan under CORP VYAPAR 10/2000 on 28.03.2000 for Rs.2.50 lakhs to the said Dakshinamurthy[A4]. Along with the loan application, six cents of land in S.No.160/1A situated at Vilakadupakkam village, had been given as equitable mortgage. The property stands in the name of one Tmt.Kousalya ammal. The loan amount has been credited into the current account opened in the name of M/s Vijaya Agency. The account was introduced by one V.Srinivasan at the request of Palanivel[A2], who is none other than the son-in-law of loanee Dakshinamurthy[A4].

3. On complaint given by Assistant Regional Manager, Mr. Sudhakar N.Bhat, a case has been registered against J.S.Prabhu, Branch Manager, V.Palanivel, Gunasekaran and other unknown public servants and private individuals on 19.07.2002, which came to be investigated by CBI and culminated in filing different charges. The trial Court has taken cognizance of these final report and has assigned as C.C.No.61 to 66 of 2004 in respect of each loan transaction to different persons but form part of the same conspiracy.

4. The case in hand arises out of C.C.No.63 of 2004. For availing the loan, one Dakshinamurthy[A4] has presented lease agreement in respect of the premises bearing Door No.33, SV Koil Street, Tambaram, Sanatorium Branch, which found to be owned by one Tmt.Janaki. Dakshinamurthy[A4] had never been in possession of the said premises. As far as the property given as collateral security is concerned, Tmt. Kousalya ammal is the owner and she had never created any equitable mortgage in favour of Corporation Bank and not stood guarantee for the loan sanctioned to Dakshinamurthy[A4]. The investigation had revealed that Tmt.Kousalya ammal gave her property document to Gunasekaran[A3] to arrange the loan. After receiving the document, Gunasekaran[A3] had never arranged loan nor returned the document to Tmt.Koysalya ammal, contrarily, he had made use of the document to avail loan by Dakshinamurthy[A4].

5. After completion of the investigation, the prosecution has laid charge against J.S.Prabhu[A1], Branch Manager of the Corporation Bank, Palanival[A2], son-in-law of Dakshinamurthy, Gunasekaran[A3], Dakshinamurthy[A4] and T.N. Ravi [Valuer]. Citta, Adangal and encumbrance certificate for the property bearing S.No.160/1A, which stood in the name of Kousalya ammal were fabricated and with the help of false valuation certificate given by T.N. Ravi[A5], Valuer, by impersonating Tmt. Kousalya ammal, the loan had been sanctioned by J.S. Prabhu[A1] in favour of Dakshinamurthy[A4] in connivance with A2[Palanivel], A3[Gunasekaran] and A5[T.N. Ravi]. Hence, they have tried for offence of cheating, criminal breach of trust, fabrication of false documents, using false document as genuine for cheating and for misconduct in respect of the public servant [A1-J.S.Prabhu].

6. The trial Court, after appreciation the oral and documentary evidence let in by the prosecution as well as the defence, has found them guilty and convicted them as under:

Rank of the accused	Conviction under Section	Sentence imposed by the trial Court
A1 to A5	Under Sections 120B, 420, 406, 467, 467 r/w 471, 419, 467, 467 r/w 471 and u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988	To undergo RI for 2 years to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- i/d to undergo RI for 6 months
A4	Under Section 420 IPC	To undergo RI for 4 years and to fin