IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas C.R.A. 128 of 2004 Parimal Roy -Versus-

The State of West Bengal For the Appellant : Ms. Monami Mukherjee, Ld. Amicus Curiae For the State : Mr. Bidyut Kumar Ray, Sr. Adv.

Hearing concluded on : 19.05.2025 Judgment On : 17.06.2025 Prasenjit Biswas, J:-

1. The instant appeal is preferred by the appellant challenging the impugned judgement and order of conviction dated 27.11.2003 passed by the learned Judge, 4th Special Court, Calcutta in connection with Special Case No. 2 of

1988.

2. By passing the impugned judgment this appellant is found guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 120B/420/465/471 of the Indian Penal Code along with fine and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment accordingly.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said impugned judgement and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court the present appeal is filed at the behest of the appellant –convict.

4. In short campus story of the prosecution is delineated hereunder:-

“Shri K.C. Balasubrananium, the Branch Manager of Central Bank of India, New Market Branch, Calcutta had entered into a criminal conspiracy with Parimal Roy (the present appellant) of village Udayarampur, P.O. Bishnupur, District- 24 Parganas (South) and out of the said conspiracy the Branch Manager of the Bank had sanctioned cash credit limit of Rs. 2,75,000/- and term loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- in favour of the firm of Parimal Roy under the name and style as M/s. Packing India, 35, C.R. Avenue, Calcutta- 700 006 alleged to be a fictitious one. The amount of the above two loans were released in favour of the accused Parimal Roy in an irregular manner without adhering the rules of the bank and allowed the accused Parimal Roy to withdraw the said amount to the tune of Rs.

3,75,000/-.”

5. Shri D.N. Biswas, Inspector of Police, C.B.I. lodged the FIR suo moto and the case was registered being Crime No. 68 of 1986 dated 23.09.1986 for the offence under Section 120B/420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section

5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

6. Thus, the criminal law was set in motion. The CBI Inspector took up the case for investigation and in course of investigation he examined witnesses, arrested the accused persons and seized some other documents under the seizure list and thereafter, he has been transferred from Calcutta to Delhi then one Pradip Christopher, Inspector CBI/S.P.E./A.C.B./Calcutta took up the investigation and after conclusion of investigation submitted charge-sheet against this appellant along with other accused persons under Section 120B/420/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with Section (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

7. Charge was framed against this appellant and other two accused persons under Section 120B/420 read with Section 34/465/471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

8. In this case, prosecution has examined 21 witnesses in order to bring home the charge levelled against the accused persons.

9. Ms. Monami Mukherjee, learned Amicus Curiae said that the prosecution has hopelessly failed to prove the case against this appellant beyond all reasonable shadow of doubt. The learned Advocate further contended that the entire investigation was done in a perfunctory manner and virtually there is no evidence at all from any of PWs to the effect that this appellant acted dishonestly in furtherance of the conspiracy to cheat the bank by any illegal act. The Bank Manager, K.C. Balasubrananium (one of the accused persons) after duly following banking procedure and rules granted loans in favour of the M/s. Packing India. It is further said by the learned Advocate that PW2 being the Deputy Chief Officer of Central Bank of India, New Market Branch never stated that there was any irregularities in the opening