LAWS(APH)-2017-6-67

CH LAXMINARAYANA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

Decided On June 01, 2017
Ch Laxminarayana Appellant
V/S
State of Telangana Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in both the petitions by name Sri Ch.Lakshmi Narayana, the then Chief Manager of State Bank of India since retired was arrayed as accused No.1 in C.C.No.23 of 2005 pending trial on the file of III Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad. It is outcome of crime No.RC/11A/2003, CBI, Hyderabad, registered against 8 accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B & 420 IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'PC Act'). The charge sheet filed for the above sections against the 8 accused including the petitioner/A.1, not to mention the names of other accused, A.2-C.V.V. Vijay Kumar Naidu, Proprietor of M/s. S.V. Enterprises, A.3-D.M.K. Naidu, Proprietor of M/s. DMK Excavations & Constructions Private Limited, A.4-YSN Reddy, Proprietor of M/s. SN Reddy Enterprises (though shown in FIR not charge sheeted), K. Ashok Kumar, Managing Director of M/s. Suryodaya Hitech Engineering Private Limited (A.5 as per FIR and A.4 as per corrected charge sheet), Sri M. Madhav Vasu, Proprietor of M/s. Timbermatics (A.6 as per FIR but not charge sheeted), Sri C.C. Mukundan Nambiar, retired AGM, SBI, and B. Sudesh Kumar respectively shown in FIR as A.7 & A.8 and because of the corrections in the charge sheet to array as A.5 & A.6.

(2.) The allegation is that the petitioner/A.1 is conspired with other accused by abusing his official position by corrupt or illegal means in sanctioning bank guarantees to various entities among other accused by causing loss of Rs.70.50 lakhs to the SBI, Padmaraonagar Branch of Secunderabad in corresponding wrongful gain to other accused viz.,

(3.) The charge sheet further discloses said Smt. A.Vijayalakshmilodged a private complaint with X Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Secunderabad, that was referred to Chilakalaguda Police Station against Lakshminarayana-A.1, M.M. Vasu-A.6, DMK Naidu-A.3 and one James and the original sale deed during investigation seized by local police and charge sheet filed from investigation. It is averred in the charge sheet that SBI, Padmaraonagar, paid total amount of Rs.94 lakhs to NSIC for the bank guarantees invoked at various times and considering 25% cash margin deposited by all the 5 firms to the Bank at the time of obtaining bank guarantee, the Bank suffered net loss of Rs.70.50 lakhs. The investigation further revealed that C.C. Mukundan Nambiar (A.7) was instrumental with dishonest and fraudulent intention to cheat the Bank in his assistance to A.2 to A.6 in getting the bank guarantees sanctioned on the basis of fake and forged security by influencing the A.1 and DMK Naidu is proved to have paid Rs.44,000/- by 2 cheques to C.C.Mukundan Nambiar (A.7) as commission for helping and aiding to A.2 to A.6 to complete the transaction. The current account No.693 in the name of M/s Aparajita Enterprises dated 11.09.1997 was opened by Ch. Vijay none other than CVV Vijay Kumar Naidu-A.2 and for opening of account introduced was by M/s. SV Enterprises (current account No.407) of Proprietor concerned of said CVV Vijay Kumar-A.2 and C.Vijay Naidu, C.V. Vijay Kumar and Vijay Ch. with the names of the account are one and the same and the photographs affixed to the account opening forms in different banks also of him and thus amounts through NSIC credited to M/s Aparajita Enterprises of the account of Vijay Kumar-A.2, who encashed and siphoned the amounts. There is meeting of minds between A.2, A.3 & A.5 in committing the fraud by submission of invoices purported to have issued by the fake entity M/s Aparajita Enterprises showing supply of raw material and the cheques received on behalf of A.2, A.3 & A.5 deposited to the account opened by A.2 and siphoned the amounts without actually receiving the raw material from alleged M/s Aparajita Enterprises and thereby along with them, A.1 is also liable. It is further mentioned that an amount of Rs.18.74 lakhs could be recovered by compromise from Suryodaya Hitech Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Thereby A.1 also liable for the substantive offence along with them and sanction order was issued against A.1 under Section 19(1)(c) of PC Act by the competent authority. The charge sheet further speaks A.2 is in abscondence.