Telangana High Court
P.Subhash Chandra Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 18 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.1367 and 1368 of 2011
COMMON JUDGMENT:
The present criminal appeals are filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C against the judgments dated 30.11.2011 passed in C.C.Nos.11 and 12 of 1994 on the file of the learned Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad (for short 'the trial Court').
2. The brief facts of the case are the accused P.Subhashchandra Reddy worked as an Accountant/Section Officer at State Bank of Mysore, Kalasiguda Branch, Secunderabad from November, 1987 till 28.03.1992. The accused is a public servant. The accused being an Accountant was in-charge of Accounts Department and Cash Section and his duties include passing of cheques and vouchers of Savings Bank and current accounts. The accused is also in-charge of housekeeping of the branch. The accused is entrusted with the job of getting the account books tallied weekly/monthly and also entrusted with the job 2 of balancing of ledgers and submission of reports. The accused during the period April, 1990 to the end of 1990 took advantage of his official position and obtained loans from several Savings Bank account holders of State Bank of Mysore, Kalasiguda branch by way of hand loans and he was promising them that he would remit the amounts into their respective Savings Bank accounts. The accused fraudulently made false credit entries into the Savings Bank account ledger sheets of the Bank customers without actually there being cash remitted. The details of the fraudulent instances of accused collecting amount of Rs.1,98,545/- from various customers and misappropriating the amount received from the customers and thereby causing wrongful loss to the Bank by making false entries in the ledger sheets are all mentioned in detail in the annexure enclosed to charge- sheet. The accused made a false credit entry to his Savings Bank Account No.8/2 and also made false credit entry in the ledger sheet of Savings Bank account No.15/1602 which is joint account of the accused himself and his wife 3 Smt.Kamalakshi. The details of false credit entries and the debit entries made by the accused are mentioned below:
1. Rs.900/- False Credit entry In S.B. A/c.8/2
2. Rs.1,600/- Do In S.B. A/c.1602 on 06-06-1991
3. Rs.35,000/- Do Do on 08-07-1991
4. Rs.2,000/- Do Do on 26.07.1991
5. Rs.1,000/- Do Do on 03.09.1991
6. Rs.4,000/- Do Do on 12.09.1991
7. Rs.12,000/- Do Do on 20.09.1991
8. Rs.40,000/- Not posted debited in S.B. A/c.8/2
3. The accused by abusing his position as a public servant dishonestly misappropriated the funds falsifying the ledgers of the Bank and obtained pecuniary advantage for himself to a tune of Rs.49,800/- (In C.C.12/1994 to a tune of 4 Rs.2,59,045/-) and thereby committed offence of criminal misconduct. The accused committed offence under Section 409 and 477-A of IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Necessary sanction to prosecute the accused as required under Section 19 (1) (c) of P.C. Act, 1988 was obtained from Chief General Manager, State Bank of Mysore. The accused appeared before the trial Court and he was furnished with copies of documents on 05.09.1994. On 14.12.1994 after hearing both sides, charges for the offence under Section 409 and 477-A of IPC and 13 (1) (c) and (d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were framed.
4. There was a judgment passed by the trial Court on 29.04.1995 whereby the accused was discharged and as against the said judgment there was an appeal preferred to the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. and the said appeal was reopened as Criminal Revision Petition No.482/2003. There are two criminal cases registered against the accused herein, one is C.C.No.12/1994 and another is of C.C.No.11 of 1994. 5 The trial Court has passed the judgments in both the matters on 29.04.1999 discharging the accused. In Crl.R.P.No.482 of 2003 against the judgment in C.C.No.11 of 1994 Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter to trial Court for de nova trial. In Crl.R.P.No.482 of 2003 preferred against the judgment in C.C.No.11 of 1994 was also disposed of by Hon'ble High Court of A.P. on 13.03.2003 allowing the petition and directing de novo trial. After disposal of Crl.R.P.No.482 of 2003 by the Hon'ble High Court and fresh trial was taken up and there are 17 witnesses examined and 44 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P44-A.
5. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, the trial Court has passed the following judgment in C.C.No.11 of 1994:
"Result: The accused being found guilty for the offence under Section 409, 477-A IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is questioned with regard to sentence.
The accused pleaded that he suffered with paralysis, he underwent for bypass surgery, he is under suspension for 6 ten years and he has to look after his children and also stated that his wife is also not keeping good health.
The accused being found guilty and convicted under Section 248(2) Cr.P.C for the offence under Section 409, 477- A IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and being heard on the quantum of sentence and considering his submissions, the accused is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount the accused shall suffer further simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section 409 IPC.
The accused is further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount the accused shall suffer further simple imprisonment for a period of three months fro the offence under Section 477-A IPC.
The accused is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount the accused shall suffer further simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence Section 13(2) r/w.13(1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The accused is also convicted in another C.C.No.11/1994. Hence the sentences awarded in this case and another C.C.No.12/1994 shall run concurrently."
6. Aggrieved by the judgment passed by the trial Court, the appellant/accused has preferred the present criminal appeals.
7
7. Heard Sri O.Kailashnath Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant(s) as well as Sri Srinivas Kapatia, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI and perused the record.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused did not place anything before this Court, which would discredit the evidence on record. Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as conviction is concerned, with regard to the sentence, it may be mentioned that the offence took place long back and during that period the appellant/accused must have repented for what he did. In these circumstances and in the interest of justice, it is expedient to take a lenient view in so far as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned.
9. These Criminal Appeals are party allowed by reducing the sentence imposed by the trial Court from one year rigorous imprisonment to four months rigorous imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 477-A IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the fine amount of 8 Rs.500/- each for the offences under Sections 409 IPC and 477-A IPC is enhanced to Rs.1000/- each; fine amount of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is enhanced to Rs.2000/-.
10. Except the above modification of the sentence, no further interference of this Court is warranted with respect to the judgments passed by the learned trial Court.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL Dated: 18.03.2024 vsu