The judgment emphasizes the importance of documentary evidence and entries in proving guilt in cases of misappropriation and falsification of accounts.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for records pertaining to the case and set aside the conviction and sentences passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Vellore in C.C.No.308 of 2011, dated 10.03.2011 which was confirmed by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore in C.A.No.80 of 2011 by judgment dated 12.04.2016.)

1. The Revision Petition is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence under Sections 408 and 477A IPC. The term of imprisonment to undergo 2 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default,to undergo SI for 3 months for each of the offences imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Lower Appellate Court is challenged in this Revision Petition.

2. The brief facts leading to the Revision Petition: The Deputy Registrar of Co-operatives, Thiruvannamalai appointed an Enquiry Officer under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act based on the report received from the Special Officer regarding misappropriation of funds in Kadaladi Primary Co-operative Society Bank. The enquiry revealed that, the Revision Petitioner herein, who was the Secretary of Kadaladi Primary Co-operative Society Bank had committed criminal breach of trust and misappropriated the funds of the Bank by falsification of accounts. Specific cases of premature withdrawal of 7 Fixed Deposits with interest without debit note and without the knowledge of the depositors and disbursement of loans in the names of 31 persons who were either not admitted as members of the society or without their request and knowledge by fabricating accounts as if the loans were disbursed to them and thereby committed appropriation of the amount. Besides, the Enquiry Report also disclosed misappropriation of Bank money, by fabrication documents pertaining to jewel loans and withdrawal of money from the account holders by falsifying accounts. By fabricating receipts, loan for lesser amount been altered to higher amount and the difference amount defrauded, thereby a total sum of Rs.17,45,491/- found cheated.

3. The Enquiry Report submitted by the Co-operative Sub- Registrar, was taken as First Information Report by the respondent police and a case was registered in Crime No.6 of 2007 for offences under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 and 477A of IPC. The two Final Reports after investigation were filed and the same were taken cognizance by the Learned Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.308 of 2007 and in C.C.No.307 of 2007.

4. In C.C.No.308 of 2007, based on the records, the trial Court framed charges against the accused/appellant herein for offences under Sections 408, 468, 471 and 477A of IPC.

5. The prosecution to prove the charges had examined 27 witnesses and marked 105 Exhibits. On the side of the defence, 2 witnesses and 3 documents relied.

6. The trial Court on appreciation of evidence, found the accused guilty only of offences under Sections 408 IPC and 477A IPC. So, for the offence under Section 408 of IPC convicted him to undergo 2 years RI and fine of Rs.1000/- in default, 3months SI and identical term of sentence for the offence under Section 477A IPC. Taking note of the fact that the accused tried for similar offence in C.C.No.307/2007, the trial Court ordered the substantive sentences in both the case shall run concurrently.

7. The accused, being aggrieved filed appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence in C.C.No.308/2007 dated 10/03/2011 and also in C.C.No.307 of 2007 dated 01.03.2011. The Criminal Appeals were heard by the Hon’ble I Additional District Judge, Vellore in C.A.No.80/2011 and C.A.No.79 of 2011 respectively and dismissed the appeals on 12/04/2016 by confirming the trial Court judgment of conviction and sentence.

8. The Revision Petition as against the lower Appellate Court judgment in C.A.No.80 of 2011 confirming the trial Court judgment in C.C.No.308 of 2007 is now under consideration.

9. The Revision Petition against the concurrent fi