K SHIVARAM SHETTY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE these two Revision Petitions arise out of the same order, they are taken up together, heard and disposed of by common order.

(2.) CRI. R. P. 355/2000 is filed by Mr. K. Shivaram Shetty-A. 1, and Cri. R. P. 269/2000 is filed by Smt. Veena Sabharwal-A. 2 and M/s. Sabsom Freight Containers Pvt. Ltd. , which is arrayed as A. 3 of which A. 2 is the Managing Director.

(3.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that A. 1-K. Shivarama Shetty, while working as Executive Director and as then chairman and M. D. of Vijaya Bank during the period 1989-90, entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat Vijaya Bank in securing various credit facilities to A. 3-M/s. Sabsom Freight Containers Pvt. Ltd. , and in furtherance of the said conspiracy, A. 1-K. Shivarama Shetty committed criminal misconduct and by corrupt, illegal means and by abuse of his official position got sanctioned various credit facilities, such as packing credit, clear cash credit, DPG facility, import letter of credit etc. , to A-3-Company without actually processing or looking into the merits of the proposal of the company and thereby caused wrongful loss to Vijaya bank to a tune of Rs. 466 lakhs and caused corresponding wrongful gain to A. 2 and A. 3. It is the further case of the prosecution that m/s. Sabsom Freight Containers Pvt. Ltd. , a. 3 was a company incorporated in 1983 for the manufacture of 20 feet containers, that A. 1 was closely associated with A. 2 Smt. Veena Sabharwal who was a business partner of M/s. Anupam Silk where Smt. Mamata Shetty, w/o. A. 1 was the other partner as per the partnership deed, that A. 1 was instrumental in getting sanctioned various facilities to A. 3 from Vijaya Bank since 1985, that A. 3, which was manufacturing 20 feet containers, approached Vijaya Bank for further funds during 1990 on the strength of orders received from M/s. ACTL london, at the appropriate levels, A. 1-K. Shivaram Shetty, got approved various facilities and funds so sanctioned and were released to the company without properly ensuring the utilisation, that A. 1 by using his official position as Executive Director of vijaya Bank, and subsequently as C and MD, showed undue interest and fraudulently and dishonestly with ulterior motives provided the sanction of various facilities to A. 3. A. 1 in violation of the norms of the Bank participated in the meeting held for the purpose of recommendation of various credit facilities to A. 3 and had managed to get various facilities to A. 3 Company, that the Order placed by M/s. ACTL, London with A. 3 company was cancelled as the company failed to manufacture the prototype of the containers ordered and thereby Vijaya Bank has been exposed to a wrongful loss to the tune of Rs. 466 lakhs. Because of the aforesaid acts of A. 1, a complaint has been lodged against the three accused for the offences punishable under Section 120-B read with section 420 of the IPC, and Section 13 (2)read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.