The central legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the accused, as the Secretary of the bank, for misappropriation and falsification of documents, leading to convictions under Sections 408, 420, and 477A of IPC.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the case and set side the conviction and sentences passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Vellore in C.C.No.307 of 2011, dated 10.03.2011 which was confirmed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore in C.A.No.79 of 2011 by judgment dated 12.04.2016.)

1. The revision petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C.No.307/2007 of the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Vellore. He was tried for the charges under Sections 408, 468, 471, 420 and 477 A of IPC. After trial, the Learned Judicial Magistrate held him guilty of charges under Sections 408, 420 and 477A of IPC and acquitted him from the charges under Sections 468 and 471 of IPC. The Trial Court convicted him to undergo one year RI and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in defaul, to undergo 1 month SI for each of the offences. The period of sentence ordered to run concurrently.

2. Being aggrieved by the trial Court judgment of conviction and sentence, the Revision Petitioner preferred appeal before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore in C.A.No.79/2011. The Lower Appellate Court confirmed the trial Court judgment and dismissed the appeal. Hence, this Criminal Revision Petition has been filed.

3. The brief facts leading to the Revision Petition:

The Revision Petitioner herein was the Secretary of the Kadaladi Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Bank between the year 1989 and 2004. PW-2 [Pandurangan], the Deputy Registrar appointed PW- 23[Anbalagan] as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the Report of Special Officer alleging irregularities in the Kadaladi Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Bank. Based on the Enquiry Report [Ex.P-89] dated 20/06/2006 indicating breach of trust and falsification of documents to defraud a tune of Rs.17,45,491/- by the Secretary of the Society Mr. Pongavanam the revision petitioner herein, C.C.I.W., CID, Thiruvannamalai registered case in Cr.No.6/2007 against the revision petitioner for offences under Sections 408, 409, 477A IPC and took up the investigation.

4. Two separate final reports were filed against the accused Poongavanam and they were taken cognizance by the Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.307/2007 and C.C.No.308/2007. The present revision petition arises from the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.307/2007 and subsequently confirmed by the lower Appellate Court in C.A.No.79/2011.

5. The substance of the charges framed against this petitioner is that, he while working as the Secretary of the Kadaladi Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Bank between 01/11/1989 and 29/03/2004 was responsible for supervising the sub-ordinates, disburse loans to the members, receive the payments and make due entries in the registers and maintain proper accounts. While so, he by fabricating the documents tampered records as if jewel loans to 20 of the Society Members was granted for a higher amount than the amount actually lend. In the suspense account, a sum of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.20,000/- was drawn and it was shown against the loan account of Govindaraj and Subramanian. Had withdrew a sum of Rs.40,000/- against One lakh rupees in the Fixed Deposit of one Mahalingam without his knowledge and consent. He withdrew money from the accounts of Selvam and Munusamy without debit note and even before sanction of loans.

6. To prove the charges, the prosecution examined 24 witnesses. Marked 90 exhibits. The accused to disprove the case of the prosecution examined 2 witnesses and marked 5 exhibits.

7. The judgment of conviction passed based on the evidence of PW-3 to PW-18 and PW-22, the members of the Society, who availed jewel loans, deposed about the actual amount they received for pledging their jewels. Whereas, in the disbursement register, higher amount has been mentioned and withdrawn. The difference has been misappropriated by the accused who was the Secretary and in-