The main legal point established in the judgment is that the investigating officer registering the case and conducting the investigation does not vitiate the case, especially when the prosecution has proved the charges through oral and documentary evidence.

P. Velmurugan, J.

This Criminal Appeal has been arising out of the judgment of the learned trial Judge acquitting the respondents. The respondents are accused 1 and 2 in C.C.No.8 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore for the offences punishable under sections 120(B) read with 420, 467, 468, 467 read with 471 and 13(2) read with 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1998.

2. The case of the prosecution is as follows :

The first respondent was working as Assistant Branch Manager in National Insurance Company Limited, Kangeyam branch during the Year 1991. He was maintaining SB Account Number 1 with Bharat Overseas Bank, Moolapalayam Branch and SB account No 716 with State Bank of India, Kangayam. As Assistant Branch Manager, he was empowered to order refund of premium already paid by the insured and to give special discount on the marine/ fire insurance policies and the second respondent was working as an Agent in National Insurance Company Limited, Erode Division during the year 1991. He is maintaining SB account No 6187 with UCO Bank Erode. He is closely known to the first respondent.

3. On 24.07.90, Marine Policy No.501405/21/26/006/90 was issued by the first respondent in favour of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited, Nilavarappatti, Salem covering the risk on machinery to the extent of Rs. 24.00 Lakhs and an amount of Rs. 4,801/- was collected as premium from the insured. The first respondent dishonestly and fraudulently prepared a letter in the letter head of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited using his office typewriter showing as if it was prepared by the insured requesting for refund of premium of Rs. 4,801/-, as the machinery was not supplied by the manufacturer. Thereafter, the first respondent forged the signature of one Ramesh, relative of one of the Directors of M/s. Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited on the above said letter showing as if the Director of M/s. Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited had signed the letter. He then made a note on the said forged letter falsely mentioning that he had verified the invoice and stocks and found that the machinery was not received by the insured. The first respondent knowing fully well that the refund claim was based on forged documents prepared by him, abused his official position and allowed refund of premium of Rs. 4,801/-. Further, he canceled the insurance policy and passed and endorsement stating that the insured was entitled for refund of Rs. 4,801/- as the goods covered under the said policy was not supplied by the manufacturer.

4. Further, the first respondent obtained the signature of Shri Prabhuram in the pre-receipt (Discharge Voucher) dated 02.07.1991 for Rs. 4,801/-, making him to believe that the said amount would be paid to M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited. He then directed Shri Velusamy, Assistant working in his office to prepare a Disbursement Voucher in the name of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited towards the refund of premium of Rs. 4,801/- and the same was authorised by him.

5. Further, the first respondent in his own handwriting prepared a Cheque No.602486 for Rs. 4,801/- in favour of the second respondent and issued it to him instead of issuing the cheque in favour of M/s. Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Ltd. The second respondent knowing fully well that the said cheque was meant for M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited and that he was not entitled for the refund of the said amount, deposited the above said cheque for Rs. 4,801/- in his SB Account No.6187 with UCO Bank, Erode and an amount of Rs. 4,770/- was credited to his account on 20.07.1991.

6. Further, Marine Insurance Policy No.501405/21/04/0010/90 was issued by the first respondent in favour of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited on 17.09.91 for the period from 30.10.90 to 29.10.91 and an amount of Rs. 2,201/- was paid as premium for the said policy. The first respondent without receiving any request letter from the insured