Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, J.
S. Sivaraman - Petitioner
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem - Respondent
Crl. O.P. No. 4916 of 2018 & Crl. M.P. No. 2441 of 2018
Decided On : 04-09-2020
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 409, 468 , 471, 477-A, 379 and 229-A - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 482 , Section 219 ,212 (2) and 311 – Offence of Criminal breach of trust – Forgery for the porpose of forgery – Falsification of accounts – Charged - Petitioner is that, while he was working as Single Window Operator (Cash) in State Bank of India, Branch from, he had forged signature of some account holders, withdrawn monies from their accounts and misappropriated them - Total amount of misappropriation was worked out - It appears that 22 final reports were filed on premise that the provisions will stand attracted in this case, limiting each final report to three transactions - It is alleged that the petitioner had withdrawn from account of Palanichamy on from account of Perumal on from account of Latha , by forging their signatures - Thus, this is not a case of simple misappropriation of money, but in order to misappropriate money, it is alleged that petitioner had forged the records and along - Held, trial Court has commenced the trial by examining one witness as P.W.1, for which, submitted that if the method propounded by this Court is adopted, petitioner will not complain of prejudice and that deposition of P.W.1 so far recorded, can be treated as evidence in ten cases - He further submitted that common witnesses need not be examined in each of ten cases separately and instead, their depositions can be recorded commonly for all ten cases, petitioner permitted to cross-examine them commonly and ten print outs of deposition (chief, cross and re-examination) so recorded be placed in each case - Therefore, charges in respect of those victims, who have either died or whose whereabouts are not known, also should be framed and petitioner questioned - If any name has been inadvertently left out, prosecution can file an application to examine him - It is possible that there may be some clerical errors in dates and amounts set out in tabular column in paragraph no.10 (supra) and hence, trial Court shall properly scrutinise records without blindly following what has been stated in paragraph no.10 (supra) and ensure that correct dates and amounts find place in charges - Assistant Public Prosecutor and Investigating Officer shall assist Court in framing charges - Criminal original petition stands disposed of accordingly - Connected Crl.M.P. stands closed.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Salem, to frame a single charge for the commission of offences under Sections 409, 468 and 471 IPC in C.C.No.34 of 2009 by clubbing 22 cases viz., C.C.Nos.34 to 55 of 2009 pending trial on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Salem.)
1. This case was taken up through video conferencing.
2. This criminal original petition has been preferred seeking a direction to the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Salem, to frame a single charge for the commission of offences under Sections 409, 468 and 471 IPC in C.C.No.34 of 2009 by clubbing 22 cases viz., C.C.Nos.34 to 55 of 2009 pending trial on the file of the said Court.
3. On a complaint lodged by the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Attayampatti Branch, the police registered a case in Crime No.68 of 2005 on 01.08.2005 for the offences under Sections 468, 471 and 477-A IPC against Sivaraman, the petitioner herein, and after completing the investigation, filed 22 final reports viz., C.C.Nos.34 to 55 of 2009 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Salem, for the offences under Sections 409, 467 and 471 IPC.
4. The nub of the allegation against the petitioner is that, while he was working as Single Window Operator (Cash) in the State Bank of India, Attayampatti Branch, from 09.07.2004 to 20.04.2005, he had forged the signature of some account holders, withdrawn monies from their accounts and misappropriated them. The total amount of misappropriation was worked out at Rs.9,70,000/-. It appears that 22 final reports were filed on the premise that the provisions of Section 219 Cr.P.C. will stand attracted in this case, limiting each final report to three transactions.
5. Complaining that undue prejudice would be caused to the petitioner, if 66 (22x3) charges are framed against him, this petition has been filed invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking framing of a single charge as laid down in Section 212(2) Cr.P.C. by clubbing the 22 cases.
6. Heard Mr. S. Jayakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. K. Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent/State.
7. Mrs. Kritika Kamal submitted that the 22 cases viz., C.C.Nos.34 to 55 of 2009 have been transferred from the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Salem, to the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.VI, Salem and they have been re-numbered as C.C.Nos.185 to 203, 205, 206 and 209 of 2018.
8. This Court perused the memorandum of evidence appended to the final reports and found that out of eleven witnesses cited in each final report, ten witnesses are common in all the cases and the name of only one witness viz., the bank customer, who was cheated, alone differs.
9. The moot question is, will Section 212 (2) Cr.P.C. apply to this case.
10. This Court pored over the records and prepared the following table for easy understanding of the indictment against the petitioner in each case.
| S. No. | C.C. No. | Witness Name | Date of withdrawal | Misappropriated amount |
| 1. | 185/2018 | A. Palanisamy/LW-4 Perumal /LW5 |
18.02.2005
|
Rs. 5,000/-
Rs.25,000/-
Rs. 8,000/- ------------ |
| 2. | 186/2018 | A. Palanisamy/LW-4
(SB A/c. No. 01190005251, S.B.I., Attayampatti Branch, Salem) |
09.03.2005
09.03.2005
09.03.2005 |
Rs.10,000/-
|
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
