STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE Vs. K PALANISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been arising out of the judgment of the learned trial Judge acquitting the respondents. The respondents are accused 1 and 2 in C.C.No.8 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore for the offences punishable under sections 120(B) read with 420, 467, 468, 467 read with 471 and 13(2) read with 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1998.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is as follows :

(3.) On 24.07.90, Marine Policy No.501405/21/26/006/90 was issued by the first respondent in favour of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited, Nilavarappatti, Salem covering the risk on machinery to the extent of Rs. 24.00 Lakhs and an amount of Rs. 4,801/- was collected as premium from the insured. The first respondent dishonestly and fraudulently prepared a letter in the letter head of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited using his office typewriter showing as if it was prepared by the insured requesting for refund of premium of Rs. 4,801/-, as the machinery was not supplied by the manufacturer. Thereafter, the first respondent forged the signature of one Ramesh, relative of one of the Directors of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited on the above said letter showing as if the Director of M/s.Pallipalayam Spinners Pvt. Limited had signed the letter. He then made a note on the said forged letter falsely mentioning that he had verified the invoice and stocks and found that the machinery was not received by the insured. The first respondent knowing fully well that the refund claim was based on forged documents prepared by him, abused his official position and allowed refund of premium of Rs. 4,801/-. Further, he canceled the insurance policy and passed and endorsement stating that the insured was entitled for refund of Rs. 4,801/- as the goods covered under the said policy was not supplied by the manufacturer.