The court affirmed that bank officials can be convicted for conspiracy and cheating when they violate banking norms and divert loan funds, establishing criminal liability under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. The accused No.1 to 3 in C.C.NO.2 of 2011, on the file of the II Additional District Court(CBI Cases) Madurai, have preferred these appeals challenging the following conviction and sentence imposed against them, vide the impugned judgment dated 12.03.2020:-

2. The brief facts of the case:-

When the appellants in Crl.A.(MD).Nos.154 and 163 of 2020, were working as managers of the Indian Overseas Bank, Thiruvanaikovil Branch, Tiruchirapalli, during the period from 23.06.2003 to 12.02.2006, they had entered into conspiracy with the private individual namely the appellant in Crl.A.(MD)No.164 of 2020, to cheat the Indian Overseas Bank and defraud an amount of Rs.2,02,42,674/- and granted loan to the following agencies managed by A2: i.M/s. Vasan News and Advertising ii.M/s. Vasan Canteen service iii.M/s.Vasan Catering Services iv.Hotel Mani vilas unit – I v.Hotel Mani Vilas unit - II Totally, seven loans were granted to the above said agencies without obtaining registered mortgage deed and sufficient securities and diverted the loan amount for some other purpose other than the purpose for which the loan was granted and therefore, caused loss of Rs.2,02,42,674/-and acted contrary to the banking norms and regional office instructions. Therefore, the CBI registered the case under Sections 120(b) r/w 420 of IPC r/w 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 , against number of persons and after the investigation, CBI filed the final report against the appellants for the above said offences before the II Additional District Court(CBI Cases) Madurai, and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.2 of 2011. After taking cognizance, in C.C.No.2 of 2011, the learned special Judge issued summons to the accused and on their appearance, served the copies under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, framed the appropriate charges and questioned the appellants and they pleaded not guilty and they stood for trial.

3. To prove the charge framed against the appellants, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.19 and marked the Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.110. After the completion of the examination of the prosecution witnesses, the learned trial Judge questioned the appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C., by putting incriminating evidence available against them and they denied them as false and specifically answered that they had not committed any offence. The appellants examined D.W