Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
K. Rajavelu - Appellant
Versus
The State - Respondent
Crl. Appeal (MD) Nos. 30, 41, 42, 56, 57, 76 of 2019, Crl. M.P. (MD) No. 14193 of 2023
Decided On : 04-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appellants and charges (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. general arguments and counterarguments presented (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. arguments made by the appellants challenging the prosecution's case. (Para 5) |
| 4. court's deliberation on conspiracy and evidence (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's observations on evidence and legal requirements for conspiracy. (Para 9) |
| 6. final decisions regarding convictions and sentences. (Para 10) |
| 7. final sentencing and recommendations (Para 11 , 13 , 14) |
| 8. mitigation considerations and conclusions (Para 15 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Accused Nos.1, 3, 5, 8, 10 and 11 in C.C.No.03 of 2009, on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge for CBI Cases, Madurai have filed these appeals, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against them.
2. A1 has filed this appeal in Crl.A.(MD) No. 56 of 2019 challenging the following conviction and sentence of imprisonment:
| Crl. A. (MD) No. | Rank of the Accused and Name | Charges proved under sections | Punishment (Imprisonment and Fine) |
| 56/2019 | A -1 K.P.Kumar @ K.P.Veer Kumar | u/s 120-B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; |
| u/s 420 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 467 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 468 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 471 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| Total Fine Rs. 30,000/- |
2.1. A3 has filed this appeal in Crl.A.(MD) No. 57 of 2019 challenging the following conviction and sentence of imprisonment:
| Crl. A. (MD) No. | Rank of the Accused and Name | Charges proved under sections | Punishment (Imprisonment and Fine) |
| 57/2019 | A -3 Dr.S.Jala Jawahar | u/s 120-B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; |
| u/s 420 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 467 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 468 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 471 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| Total Fine Rs. 25,000/- |
2.2. A5 has filed this appeal in in Crl.A.(MD) No. 30 of 2019 challenging the following conviction and sentence of imprisonment:
| Crl. A. (MD) No. | Rank of the Accused and Name | Charges proved under sections | Punishment (Imprisonment and Fine) |
| 30/2019 | A -5 Dr.K.Rajavelu | u/s 120-B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; |
| u/s 420 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 467 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 468 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Three months; | ||
| u/s 471 IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pa | ||
Convictions confirmed despite appeals; conspiracies in financial fraud established through corroborated evidence, with sentences mitigated based on health conditions.
The case establishes that bank officials can be charged with conspiracy and cheating for failing to adhere to loan granting procedures, leading to significant financial losses to the institution.
The court emphasized that conspiracy and corruption charges may jointly apply to multiple accused involved in fraudulent bank loan approvals, with evidence needed to establish conspiracy beyond doubt....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of sufficient evidence to prove dishonesty and overestimation of property value in cases of conspiracy to cheat a bank.
The court emphasized that a trial can proceed against a living accused despite the death of a co-accused, maintaining that accusations cannot be abated due to such circumstances.
The court affirmed that individuals involved in facilitating loans under fraudulent circumstances can be held accountable, reflecting the principle of personal culpability in conspiracy and fraud off....
The judgment emphasizes the need for independent evidence for each offense, the distinct and independent nature of certain offenses, and the application of section 26 of the General Clauses Act in de....
The appellate court can overturn acquittals where the trial court's findings are perverse or unsustainable based on evidence, emphasizing the need for appropriate sentencing in cases of conspiracy an....
The ingredients of the offenses under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120(B) of the IPC are satisfied when a person fraudulently induces another person to invest money in a scheme, promising high re....
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
