SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3385

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
R. Karpura Sundara Pandian - Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by the Inspector of Police - Respondent
Crl. Appeal (MD) Nos. 6, 7 of 2018
Decided On : 04-03-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : B. Saravanan, N. Ananda Kumar
For the Respondent: C. Muthusaravanan

The court held that the appellant's actions constituted cheating and forgery, emphasizing misuse of authority and intent to deceive in bank transactions.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1)(c), 13(2) - Conviction for cheating and forgery - The appellant, a bank officer, misappropriated funds from two individuals under false pretenses, namely the promise of securing a loan from the bank in exchange for fixed deposits, issuing forged receipts in the process. The prosecution established a clear case of forgery and cheating by demonstrating discrepancies in deposit documentation and the lack of authorization for the appellant's actions. (Paras 2.1, 2.2, 7.1, 7.5, 12.1)

Facts of the case:
The appellant induced the victims to part with substantial sums under pretenses of securing them bank loans, issuing fake receipts for deposits that were never made. Legal proceedings were initiated following complaints by the victims, leading to a CBI investigation.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the trial judge's conclusions, finding the appellant guilty based on substantial evidence proving his guilt under the cited sections.

Issues: The primary legal questions centered on the appellant's misrepresentation of authority, the legitimacy of the charges based on a single FIR for two cases, and the significance of the bank's alleged lack of loss.

Ratio Decidendi: The appellant's actions constituted a clear intent to deceive, with the court emphasizing that his conduct demonstrated a breach of trust fundamental to his position. The court dismissed the defense's claims regarding procedural flaws and insufficient loss to the bank.

Result: Appeals dismissed, conviction upheld, and bail bond cancelled.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and convictions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. argument about the legality of multiple final reports. (Para 3)
3. prosecution's stance on the evidence and authority. (Para 4)
4. consideration of evidence and questions raised. (Para 5)
5. proof of forgery established through various witnesses. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
6. discussion on the validity of two final reports. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
7. definition of white-collar crime and its implications. (Para 13)
8. conclusion on appellant's misconduct and sentencing. (Para 14)
9. final judgement and dismissal of appeals. (Para 15)

JUDGMENT :

1. These Criminal Appeals have been filed to set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the II Additional District Court for CBI Cases, Madurai, in C.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2010, dated 28.11.2017. Since these criminal appeals are arising out of the same crime, these cases are taken up for hearing together and disposed of by way of this common judgment.

2. Brief facts of the case:

The appellant in C.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2010, on the file of the II Additional District Court for CBI Cases, Madurai, has filed these appeals before this Court, challenging the Judgments dated 28.11.2017 whereby, in both cases, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced to undergo the appellant for the following offences:

S. NosOffences under Section (in C.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2010)Punishment (Imprisonment and fine) (in C.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2010)
1420 of IPCUndergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months
2409 of IPCUndergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months
3467 of IPCUndergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months
4468 r/w 471 of IPCUndergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months
513(2) r/w 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988Undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months
Total FineRs.65,000/-

2.1. The accused, namely, R.Karpura Sundara Pandian, who was working as Assistant Manager of the IDBI Bank Ltd.,Cantonment Branch, Trichy, is the appellant herein. He faced the trial in C.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2010, on the file of the II Additional District Court for CBI cases, Madurai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 , 409, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988.

2.2. According to the prosecution, the appellant herein approached the Chairman, Alpha Foundation for Education and Research (Charitable Trust), Trichy, namely, Dr.R.Palani, and promised him to get a loan of Rs.750,000,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Crores only) from the IDBI Bank, for which he requested him to make fixed deposit and he received a sum of Rs.56,00,000/-(Rupees Fifty Six Lakhs). Instead of making the fixed deposit in the IDBI Bank Account, the appellant gave fake pay-in-slips and fixed deposit receipts and misappropriated the fund of Dr.R.Palani. On finding out the forgery, Dr.R.Palani, gave a complaint to the IDBI Bank Management. The Bank Management on enquiry found that forgery had been committed by the Appellant and directed P.W.5 to lodge a complaint to CBI and accordingly P.W.5 gave complaint to CBI. On the basis of the complaint given by P.W.5/Jotty M.Chacko, the CBI registered the case against the appellant. During the course of the investigation, the investigating agency found that similar modus operandi was played by the appellant, against one Dilip Iyangar, i.e. he received a sum of Rs.111.50 lakhs from the said Dilip Iyangar on various occasions and issued 12 fake fixed deposit receipts and issued 35 numbers of pay in slips without his signature and to make the said Dilip Iyangar believe that his mon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top