JOHAN FERNANDO AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the complaint dated 09.04.2002, [EX-P1], given by J.S.Vasan [PW-1], the Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank, Madurai, the Central Bureau of Investigation registered a case in Crime No.RC. 1/E/2002, CBI/EOW, on 19.04.2002, vide printed FIR [EX-P243], for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 409, 467, 468 r/w 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and substantive offences under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468 r/w 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against seven accused and after completing the investigation, S.Syed Bazulla, Inspector of Police, CBI, EOW, Chennai, [PW-63], filed a final report on 02.07.2003, before the Special Court for CBI Cases, Madurai, against Niyas Khan @ Abdul Razzaq, [A-1 - absconding], Raaj Kafur @ Mohammed Asmath [A-2 - absconding], John Fernando [A-3], J.Sharmila, [A-4], W/o.John Fernando [A-3], S.Arumugam [A-5], A.Sundar Singh [A-6] and T.Mohan [A-7] for the aforesaid offences.

(2.) After the final report was filed, Raaj Kafur @ Mohammed Asmath [A-2 - absconding] was arrested by the CBI and apart from this case, there is yet another case of similar nature against him. The case against Niyas Khan @ Abdul Razzaq, [absconding accused - A-1] was split up, on account of which, there is a change in the array of the accused, namely, Mohammed Asmath [A-1], John Fernando [A-2], J.Sharmila [A-3], S.Arumugam [A-4], S.Sundar Singh [A-5] and T.Mohan [A-6] and charges for the aforesaid offences were framed by the Special Court for CBI Cases, Madurai and the case was taken up as C.C.No.9 of 2003.

(3.) On the appearance of the accused, they were furnished with the copies of the relied upon documents under Section 207 Cr.PC., and the trial Court framed eight charges against them for the aforesaid offences and when questioned, they pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined 63 witnesses and marked 259 exhibits. When the accused were questioned about the incriminating circumstances appearing against them under Section 313 Cr.PC., they denied the same. On behalf of the accused, no witness was examined, but, EX-D1 to EX-D15 were marked.