JUDGMENT :

(Prayer in both Crl.R.Cs.: Criminal Revision Cases filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to set aside the judgment passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, in Criminal Appeal No.98 of 2013, dated 17.12.2014, reversing the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, in C.C.No.73 of 2004, dated 31.01.2013.)

1. The matters are heard through “Video Conference”.

The convicted accused Nos.1 and 2 have preferred the above criminal revision cases against the judgment passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, in Criminal Appeal No.98 of 2013, dated 17.12.2014, reversing the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, in C.C.No.73 of 2004, dated 31.01.2013.

2. The respondent police has filed final report in Crime No.1 of 2003 alleging that the first accused by name Selvaraj was working as Secretary and the second accused namely, Sundaramurthy was working as Cashier in Ponneri Co-operative Rural Bank. On 14.10.1996, A.1 has falsified the accounts and misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the fixed deposit of Thiru Masilamani and further, on 20.03.1997, A.1 has falsified the accounts and misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,73,000/- from the fixed deposit of Thiru Mohideen Sahib. The second accused, without verifying the accounts, gave fixed deposit money to A.1 and therefore, A.2 has abetted the illegal act of A.1. Hence, both A.1 and A.2 have committed criminal breach of trust, forgery of valuable security, using as genuine a forged document, falsification of accounts and fraudulent of accounts and therefore, A.1 is liable to be punished for the offences under Sections 408, 467, 471 and 477(A) of IPC and A.2 is liable to be punished for the offences under Sections 109 r/w.408, 467, 471 and 477(A) of IPC.

3. During trial, on the side of the prosecution, 11 witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 to 11 and 23 documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.23. On the side of the accused, no witness was examined and no document was marked.

4. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, after considering both oral and documentary evidence produced on the side of the prosecution, has acquitted both A.1 and A.2 from the charges levelled against them. As against the said order of acquittal, the state has preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.98 of 2013 before the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur and the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, has allowed the said appeal and set aside the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, and convicted and sentenced both the accused Nos.1 and 2 under the aforementioned Sections. As against the said conviction and sentence passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, the first accused has preferred Crl.R.C.No.40 of 2015 and the second accused has preferred Crl.R.C.No.11 of 2015.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and also perused the records.

6. On a perusal of records, it is seen that P.W.1, who is the Sub-Registrar of Ponneri, was appointed as an enquiry officer and he conducted enquiry and submitted his report on 29.07.2002.

7. P.W.2 was working as Sub-Registrar of Ponneri and he has passed an order whereby, P.W.7/Development Officer at Minjur Panchayat Union was appointed as an enquiry officer under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 [hereinafter referred to as the Act]. The said order was marked as Ex.P.2. P.W.3 is the Secretary of Ponneri Rural Co-operative Bank. In the presence of two directors of the bank, the locker was opened and verified the things in the locker. They were found that all the jewels in the locker are correct. On 24.11.1997, an order was passed by the bank to all the staff in the bank to verify all the accounts and submit their report. They came to know that the accounts were falsified and misappropriated the