Back
2020 Supreme(Mad) 494
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
S. Ravi & Others – Appellants
Versus
The State by the Inspector of Police, CBI/ACB/CHENNAI, (RC No.51(A)/2001 – Respondent
CRL.A. Nos. 949, 905 & 950 of 2007
Decided On : 07-07-2020
For the Appellant :P. Kumaresan, R.M. Meenakshi Sundaram, Prakash Goklaney, C.K.M. Appaji, Advocates.
For the Respondent: K. Srinivasan, Special Public Prosecutor
The main legal point established in the judgment is the fraudulent issuance and use of false inland letters of credit, leading to wrongful loss to the bank, and the court's careful consideration of the evidence presented to determine the complicity of the appellants in the conspiracy.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 374(2) - Conviction under Section 120(B) and Section 420 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 120(B) and Section 420 IPC. The judgment also highlighted the fraudulent issuance and use of false and fabricated inland letters of credit, leading to wrongful loss to the bank and wrongful gain to the accused. The court analyzed the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense, and modified the sentences of the appellants A1 to A3.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted in C.C.No.12 of 2002 for offenses under Section 120(B) and Section 420 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the appellants were involved in a criminal conspiracy to cheat the bank by issuing and using false inland letters of credit, causing wrongful loss to the bank.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that A1 to A3 were involved in the fraudulent issuance and use of false inland letters of credit, leading to wrongful loss to the bank. The court modified the sentences of A1 to A3. However, the court found that A4 to A9 and A11 were not proven to be part of the conspiracy and set aside their conviction and sentence.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the fraudulent issuance and use of false inland letters of credit, the complicity of the appellants in the conspiracy, and the wrongful loss caused to the bank.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and documentary evidence, which proved the involvement of A1 to A3 in the fraudulent activities. The court also considered the lack of evidence against A4 to A9 and A11, leading to the setting aside of their conviction and sentence.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeals, modifying the sentences of A1 to A3 and directing the trial court to secure them for the remaining period of their sentence. The court also set aside the conviction and sentence of A4 to A9 and A11, allowing Crl.A.No.949 of 2007.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer in C.A.No.949 of 2007: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment of conviction passed in C.C.No.12 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Special Judge, CBI Cases at Chennai dated 28.09.2007 sentencing the appellants/accused 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11 to undergo one year R.I for the offence under Section 120(B) IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- each and in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 months, to undergo 1 year R.I for the offence under Section 420 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- each and in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 months.
C.A.No.905 of 2007: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment passed in C.C.No.12 of 2002 dated 28.09.2007 convicting the appellant by the learned 9th Additional Special Judge, CBI cases at Chennai and to set aside the same for the following among other.
C.A.No.950 of 2007: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment of conviction passed in C.C.No.12 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Special Judge, CBI cases at Chennai dated 28.09.2007 sentencing the appellants/accused 2 and 3 to undergo one year R.I for the offence under Section 120(B) IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of 18 months, to undergo 2 years R.I for the offence under Section 420 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of 18 months.)
1. The Appellant in C.A.No.905 of 2007 is A1 and the Appellants in C.A.No.950 of 2007 are A2 and A3 and the Appellants in C.A.No.949 of 2007 are A4 to A9 and A11 in C.C.No.12 of 2002. They were convicted in C.C.No.12 of 2002 by Judgment dated 28.09.2007 rendered by the Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai.
2. The conviction and sentence of the trial Court are as follows:-
| Appellant/Accused | Conviction and Sentence |
| A1 | Convicted under Section 120B and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and imposed fine of Rs.1,00,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for one year. Convicted under Section 467 r/w 471 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- in default to undergo for a period one year. Convicted under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- in default to undergo one year imprisonment. |
| A2 | Convicted under Section 120B and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and imposed fine of Rs.1,50,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for 18 months. Convicted under Section 420 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- in default to undergo for a period 18 months. |
| A3 | Convicted under Section 120B and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and imposed fine of Rs.1,50,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for 18 months. Convicted under Section 420 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- in default to undergo for a period 18 months. |
| A4 | Convicted under Section 120B and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and imposed fine of Rs.25,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for 3 months. Convicted under Section 420 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- in default to undergo for a period 3 months. |
| A5 | Convicted under Section 120B and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and impose |
