B.P. KISHORE, BASAVESHWARANAGARA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are heard and disposed of by this common judgment as they are filed by the accused in the same case.

(2.) The appellant in the first of these appeals was arraigned as accused no.1 (Hereinafter referred to as 'A.1', for brevity) and the appellant in the second of these appeals is arraigned as accused no.2 (Hereinafter referred to as 'A.2', for brevity). A.1 was employed as the Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Chickpet Branch, Bangalore during the period 1989 to 1993. A.2 was an excise contractor, who had an account with the said branch of Vijaya Bank. It is the case of the prosecution that A.1 and A.2 had entered into a criminal conspiracy and had committed forgery by fabricating bogus bank guarantees, purportedly furnished by Vijaya Bank, Chickpet Branch favouring the Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Gulbarga, on behalf of A.2. On the basis of such bank guarantees, it is alleged that A.2 had been enabled to participate in the excise auctions for general vending of arrack at Jewargi Taluk, Gulbarga District and thereby earned huge monetary benefit, which was allegedly shared with A.1 and caused corresponding loss to the bank.

(3.) It was the further case of the prosecution that in furtherance of the conspiracy, A.1, by abusing his official position, did not record the particulars of the bank guarantees so furnished on behalf of A.2, namely, Bank Guarantee Nos.3/1989 dated 5.7.1989 for a sum of Rs.5,60,000/-, 2/1991 dated 15.7.1991 for a sum of Rs.23,31,200/-, 4/1992 dated 20.7.1992 for Rs.18,16,000/-, and 5/1992 dated 20.7.1992 for a sum of Rs.90,800/-, which were required to be entered in the Bank Guarantee Register maintained at the bank. It was further alleged that A.1 obtained the loan application for the bank guarantees from A.2 and processed it himself and forwarded it to the Zonal Office of Vijaya Bank for sanction. But before the same was sanctioned, the bank guarantees had been issued to A.2 and there was no record maintained in the bank as to the collection of commission, from A.2, towards the issuance of such bank guarantees. It was also alleged that A.2 had collected the aforesaid four bank guarantees on two occasions from the Excise Department, Gulbarga, on the pretext that the same would be returned to the Vijaya Bank and had managed to destroy the same. It was also alleged that A.1 collected the commission for the issuance of the bank guarantees and did not credit it into the bank's account and A.1 had deliberately destroyed the official correspondence carried on by the excise authorities with the bank relating to the issue of bank guarantees. It is on the basis of the preliminary inquiry conducted, that a case was registered against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 120-B read with 420, 468, 471, 477A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'PC Act', for brevity) and further proceedings had been taken through the court. A search was carried out of the residential premises of A.1 and certain documents were seized and after further proceedings, a charge sheet was filed against A.1 and A.2.