ORDER

This revision is filed as against the judgment passed in CA.No.40 of 2015 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Court, Erode dated 28.03.2018, thereby confirmed the judgment passed in CC.No.798 of 2010 dated 12.05.2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-III, Erode, thereby convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections

120(B), 471, 420 r/w 109, 468 r/w 109 of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution is that during the first week of December 1993, at Sadgar Lodge, Church Gate, Mumbai City, the appellant herein and the first accused Salim Siraj Gillani and the third accused committed criminal conspiracy by entering into an agreement to do certain acts or offences of committing forgery of stolen Bank demand drafts, using them as genuine and cheating the financial institutions and others in Tamilnadu by encashing them through fraudulent means. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, the first accused Salim @ Siraj Gillini committed forgery by filling up of two blank demand drafts with serial No.001707 and 001710 which he obtained as stolen properties from Bank of India at Nagapada Branch at Mumbai City to the value of Rs.4,86,200/- and Rs.4,91,400/- in favour of the fictitious names of Usha Traders and Lakshmi Enterprises respectively purporting to have been genuinely issued by the said Bank of India, Nagpada Branch, Mumbai intending that the same should be used for the purpose of cheating by fraudulent encashment. On 24.12.1993, the accused A4 Muthukrishnan Oil Stores situated at Ettayapuram, Tuticorin, this appellant / accused who is the second accused herein handed over the said two forged demand drafts to A3 and A4 for using the same as genuine and cheating the financier at Erode. But both A3 and A4 handed over the same to A5, A6 and the approver witness Dhayanidhi on 27.12.1993 at the said Shop of A4 for the same purpose.

2.1 Thereupon on 28.12.1993 at Erode, approver witness Thayanidhi committed further forgery by fraudulently signing as Ramesh for Usha Traders and as Nagaraj for Lakshmi Enterprises on the said forged demand drafts respectively on the direction and abetment of A5 intending that they should be used for the purpose of cheating the bank. Thereupon in further pursuance of the above said conspiracy on 28.12.1993 at Erode, A4, A5 and the approver witness Thayanidhi fraudulently and dishonestly used as genuine the said forged demand drafts which they knew to be forged documents by presenting them before the Catholic Syrian Bank and Punjab National Bank both situated at Cutchery Road, Erode, and thereby cheated both the said banks by inducing them to deliver the sum of Rs.4,86,200/- and Rs.4,91,400/- to the 8th accused Murugesan.

2.2 During this occurrence, accused A7 abetted A5 and A6 by introducing A8 to them for these purpose, and A8 associated with A5 and A6 in the commission of offence in presenting both the said demand drafts with his signature and in his name into the said banks for encashment and A10 abetted the accused A8 in the commission of the above said offences by fraudulently accepting both the above said forged demand drafts without comparing the code number and signatures of issuing authority and cleared them as genuine instruments for the encashment of money through Catholic Syrian Bank and Punjab National Bank, Erode knowing well that the said demand drafts appeared to have been drawn on the Bank of India, Erode Branch code No. as 8002, where the actual code number of this Branch was 8202. Hence, the Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, CID, Erode charge sheeted the accused under Sections 120(B), 468 r/w 109, 471, 420 r/w 109 of IPC.

2.3 On receipt of the charge sheet, the trial court framed charges as against accused persons under Sections 120(B), 468, r/w 109, 471, 420 r/w 109 of IPC. In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution examined PW1 to PW24 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P37. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no docume