R.Lakshminarasimhan v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on: 12.06.2023

Pronounced on: 23.06.2023 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN R.Lakshminarasimhan, ... 1st Accused/Appellant.

in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013 /versus/ The Inspector of Police, ACB, CBI, Chennai - 600 006.

(R.C.No.32(A)/92) ... Complainant/Respondent.

in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013 Prayer in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., pleased to allow this Criminal Appeal set aside the conviction of the appellant awarded by the Learned XI Additional Special Judge for C.B.I cases, Chennai in C.C.No.29 of 2005, on his file acquit the appellant of all the charges with which he stood charged.

For Appellant : Mr.N.Manoharan in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013 For Respondent : Mr.K.Srinivasan, Senior Counsel, in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013 Special Public Prosecutor (C.B.I) Page No.1/23

1. R.Gurumurthy, ... 3rd Accused/Appellant.

in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013

2. N.Radhakrishnan, (died**) ... 4th Accused/Appellant.

in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013 ** Criminal Appeal No.359 of 2013 stand abated as against the 2nd appellant/N.Radhakrishnan as per Court order dated 13.07.2022.

/versus/ State Inspector of Police, A.C.B, C.B.I., Chennai - 600 006.

R.C.No.32 (A)/92 ... Complainant/Respondent in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013 Prayer in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., pleased to allow this Criminal Appeal set aside the conviction of the appellant awarded by the Learned XI Additional Special Judge for C.B.I cases, Chennai in C.C.No.29 of 2005, dated 23.04.2013 on his file acquit the appellant of all the charges with which he stood charged.

For Appellant : Mr.V.Srikanth, for in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013 Mr.T.I.Ramanathan For Respondent : Mr.K.Srinivasan, Senior Counsel, in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013 Special Public Prosecutor (C.B.I) Page No.2/23

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T On 31/08/1992, the CBI register a case against Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan, (A-1), the Assistant Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch. M/s.Vijayalakshmi Agencies, (A-2) a partnership firm, M/s.Continental Exports (A-3), M/s.Guru Exports (A-4) and M/s.Saha Traders and Exports (A-5). A-3 to A-5 were shown as proprietary concern. After investigation, the Final Report was filed after 13 years on 24/10/2005. By the time, the final report filed, Thiru.L.Muthiah, Proprietor of M/s.Continental exports and Mr.S.Sanathanam, the Senior Manager of the Indian Overseas Bank, died and their names were shown in the column (2) of the final report. Shri.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan, Assistant Manager, IOB, Mylapore Branch, his father Thiru.N.Radhakrishnan, the Proprietor of M/s.Saga Traders and Exports, and his brother Shri.R.Suryanarayanan, one of the partners of M/s.Vijayalakshmi Agencies, and another brother Thiru.R.Gurumurthy as Proprietor of M/s.Guru Exports were arrayed as accused and sent for trial.

Page No.3/23

2. The trial Court framed charges on 09/07/2008. By the time, the charge framed, the another accused in this case by name R.Surya Narayanan, S/o.N.Radhakrishnan died. The substance of the charges, which culminated after the investigation was that, Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan along with his brothers and father in connivance with Shri.L.Muthiah (deceased) and Shri.S.Sanathanam (deceased) entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the Indian overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch where A-1 Shri.Lakshmi Narasimhan was working as the Assistant Branch Manager. Pursuant to the conspiracy, to clear the loan availed by M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies run by his family members of A-1, floated 3 firm, i). M/s.Continental Exports in the name of Shri.L.Muthiah (deceased) a close family friend of A-1. ii).

M/s Guru Exports in the name of Gurumurthy, the brother of A-1 and M/s.Saha Traders and Exports in the name of Radhakrishnan, the father of A1. These firms are fictitious, one floated for the purpose of getting loans in the names of these firms and later to utilize it for clearing the outstanding loan of M/s.Vijayalakshmi Agencies which is a partnership firm consisting of the family members of A-1.

Page No.4/23

3. The accused being the Assistant Branch Manager, with the help of the deceased Santhanam, who was the Chief Manager of the Branch at the relevant point of time was managed by manipulation to get the loan sanctioned without proper proof for the stocks in trade or even existence of business. Thereby, the Indian Overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch had sustained loss about Rs.33,27,837.20/-

4. The trial Court has framed charges under Section 120-B r/w 420 I.P.C and section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C Act against all the accused. Against A-1, A-3 and A-4, charge under Section 420 I.P.C for cheating the Bank and against A-1, second charge under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C Act, 1988, for abusing his position as a public servant to obtain pecuniary advantage causing wrongful loss to the Indian Overseas bank to a tune of Rs.33,27,827.20.

5. Lakshmi Narasimhan (A-1), his brother Gurumurthy (A-3) and Radhakrishnan (A-4) tried for the above said charges by the trial Court and after considering 13 witnesses for prosecution (P.W.1 to P.W.13) and 68 exhibits (Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.68) and 3 exhibits for the defence, held them guilty and sentenced Page No.5/23

them as below:- Accused Offence under Section Conviction and Sentence imposed by the Trial Court 120-B r/w 420 I.P.C and u/s. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C Act, 1988 To undergo R.I for 7 (seven) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,00,000/-, in default to undergo S.I for 1 (one) year.

A1 R.Lakshmi Narasimhan 420 of I.P.C To undergo R.I for 7 (seven) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,00,000/-, in default to undergo S.I for 1 (one) year.

13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) P.C Act, 1988.

To undergo R.I for 7 (seven) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,00,000/-, in default to undergo S.I for 1 (one) year.

120-B r/w 420 I.P.C and u/s. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C Act, 1988 To undergo R.I for 3 (three) years each and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to undergo S.I for 6 (six) months.

A3 R.Gurumurthy A4 Radhakrishnan 420 of I.P.C To undergo R.I for 3 (three) years each and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to undergo S.I for 6 (six) months.

The above sentences shall run concurrently, but the default sentences shall run consecutively. The period of imprisonment already undergone, if any, is ordered to be set off.

6. Aggrieved by that, C.A.No.343 of 2013 is filed by Mr.Lakshmi Narasimhan and C.A.No. 359 of 2013 of 2013 is preferred by Mr.R.Gurumurthy and Mr.N.Radhakrishnan jointly. Pending appeal, N.Radhakrishnan, the Second Page No.6/23

Appellant in C.A.No.359 of 2013 died on 15th March 2015. On production of the death certificate, this Court had recorded that the appeal as far as 2nd appellant (Radhakrishnan) is abated.

Argument by the Learned Counsels for the appellants:-

7. The Learned Counsels representing the appellants submitted that, the Court below had not properly appreciated the evidence placed before it. The documents produced by the accused, during the course of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses were not properly considered. On an erroneous impression that, M/s.Continental Exports, M/s.Guru Exports and M/s.Saha Trades and Exports are all non-existing and fictitious firms, the case was registered based on the source information. Without proper investigation, solely for the reason that these firms were started by a person known to A-1 (Lakshmi Narasimhan) or his relatives, they all were prosecuted.

8. The Trial Court, contrary to the documentary and oral evidence had erroneously held that there is no trade or business done by these firms or the trade transactions was adequate to show they really done business to avail cash credit Page No.7/23

loan on hypothecation of goods or KCC. The business transactions relating to exports of these firms were not placed before the Court by the prosecution for correct appreciation.

9. The Learned Counsels appearing for the appellants submitted that claiming a firm as fictitious is entirely different from a firm which does not carry on adequate business. The Trial Court, after holding that there was business but not adequate, ought not to have accepted the prosecution case that these three firms are fictitious.

10. The Learned Counsel appearing for Mr.Lakshmi Narasimhan, the appellant in C.A.No.343 of 2013, submitted that, prosecution had failed to prove that the loan advance to the firms M/s.Continental Export, M/s.Saha Trades and Exports and M/s.Guru Exports was diverted to discharge the loan availed by M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies. According to appellant's counsel, except the fact that M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies is a partnership firm consisting of the father, mother, brother and wife of A-1 (Lakshmi Narasimhan) as its partners. There is no evidence to show that the dues of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies were paid from Page No.8/23

the loans sanctioned to M/s.Continental Exports run by Thiru.L.Muthiah, who alleged to be friend of A-1 or M/s.Guru Exports run by Mr.R.Gurumurthy, the brother of A-1 or M/s.Saha Trades & Exports run by N.Radhakrishnan, the father of A-1. The evidence relied by the prosecution is highly preposterous and presumptive in nature, which fail the test of reliability. When there is no documentary evidence to link the first accused with the borrowers, the charge of conspiracy has to fail. Friendship or blood relation cannot be a reason to attribute conspiracy. The appellant as the Assistant Manager had discharged his duty in his official capacity and cannot be held to have abused his office and misconducted to obtain pecuniary advantage.

11. Referring Ex.D.1, the letter of L.Ramani, Chief Manager of the Bank addressed to the Small Scale Industries Division at the Regional Office of IOB, the Learned Counsels for the appellants submitted that, the proposal of the Chief Manager of the Bank, to regularize the packing credit offered to M/s.Saha Trades & Exports and its sister concern M/s.Guru Exports is a proof that these two firms are not fictitious and they are running concern. In this letter marked as Ex.D.1, Mr.L.Ramani, Chief Manager, had recommended to the Regional Office to Page No.9/23

allow the firms to operate their accounts within the existing limit of Rs.10 lakhs, since the packing credit was sanctioned to them for a period of 180 days and the said period was not expired. Also, the Trial Court failed to take note of the fact that, Rs.5 lakhs was paid on behalf of M/s.Guru Exports on 19/02/2004, which is proved through Ex.D.2. This payment was made pursuant to the letter of undertaking given by Mrs.L.Rajeswari, which is marked as Ex.D.3.

12. Argument of the Special Public Prosecutor:- Per contra, the Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for CBI submitted that, the prosecution had proved beyond doubt, the charges of conspiracy, cheating and abuse of official position to obtain pecuniary advantage to the tune of Rs.33.27 lakhs. The first accused, while serving as Assistant Manager in Indian Overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch, along with his Superior Thiru.Santhanam, who was serving as Manager had devised the design to cheat the Bank and in execution of the said design, the commission of crime been carried. The crime came to light, when P.W.1, Mr.P.Vasantha Rao, the Deputy Chief Officer in I.O.B, Regional Office, conducted inspection of the account in the name of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies, M/s.Continental Exports, M/s.Guru Exports and Page No.10/23

M/s.Saha Trades & Export. He has noticed the irregularities in all the four accounts and submitted his inspection report to the AGM at Regional Office, Chennai. The records show that the account of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies opened on 31/07/1989 with the introduction of the first accused Mr.Lakshmi Narasimhan. In the said account opening form Ex.P-1, M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies is shown as a partnership firm. The Current Account No.3006 is assigned by the Bank. In this account opening form, the customer is introduced by A-1 (R.Lakshmi Narasimhan). In the application form Ex.P.1, does not contain details about the partners and their addresses, in the columns meant for it, in the printed form kept 'blank', except signature of the one person, above the space for depositors, no other details available in the application form.

There is another Current Account No.3008 in the name of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies, which is marked as Ex.P.13. In this application (Ex.P.13), the details of the partners is available. For the said M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies, loan for Rs.2,00,000/- sanctioned on 14/09/1989, based on the loan application Ex.P.2. The loan sanction letter Ex.P.3 indicates that, the Cash Credit against hypothecation of fully paid stocks valued at Rs.2,00,000/- is the security for the said loan. All the partners of the firm in their personal capacity and Mrs.J.Rajeswari and Page No.

Mrs.S.Rajeswari, are shown as the guarantors for the loan. On 18/10/1989, vide the sanction letter Ex.P.4, the credit limit enhanced by Rs.2,50,000/- against additional security and further enhanced to Rs.5,00,000/- vide Ex.P.5 dated 30/12/1989. The letter of sanction Ex.P.5 addressed to the Chief Manager of the Branch, specifically noted the 6 items as collateral security for the loan and instructed, all the formalities relating to deposit of title deeds/Hypothecation of stocks/Obtainment of guarantees shall be completed before release of enhanced limit.

13. What they obtained and available as security for the loans advanced to M/s.Vijayalakshmi Agencies are i). A pro-note for Rs.2 lakhs marked Ex.P-6, dated 05/09/89, ii). Ex.P-7, dated 08/01/1990 a pro-note for Rs.5 lakhs and iii).Ex.P.10 dated 19/03/1990, a pro-note for Rs 10 lakhs signed by all its partners. The letters of hypothecation Ex.P.11 and Ex.P.12 signed only by two of its partners. Even without disclosing the identity of the partners of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies, for obvious reason, the Chief Manager, Late.Santhanam had permitted to open Current Account No:3006 on the introduction of A-1. Further, without properly obtaining the securities mentioned in Ex.P.5 the letter of sanction Page No.12/23

issued by the Regional office, loans were disbursed.

14. R.Lakshmi Narasimhan (A1) vide Ex.P.15 had recommended for providing loan with a limit of Rs.4 lakhs to M/s.Continental Exports. His request for the approval loan under Open Cash Credit limit of Rs.4 lakhs sanctioned by Chief Manager Thiru.Late.Santhanam on 20/04/1991. A-1, in his letter Ex.P.34, addressed to Chief Manager on 06/11/1991 had recommended Packing Credit Limit for Rs.3 Lakhs to M/s.Continental Exports. The letter of contract dated 25/07/1991 purported to have been entered between the foreign buyer found to be fake. For the outstanding loan of M/s.Continental Exports, A-1 had executed the guarantee deed marked as Ex.P.19 on 19/03/1992. Similar modus operandi carried by A-1 in the case of M/s.Guru Exports for which, he stood as guarantor by executing Ex.P-39 deed.

The trail of the loan amounts of these firms landed in the account of M/s.Vijayalakshmi Agencies and same is proved through the ledger accounts and books of entries marked as prosecution exhibits and duly spoken by concern Bank staff. The intention of A-1 and his family members to cheat the bank in connivance with the Chief Manager, Late.Santhanam been established through the documents of in respect of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi agencies, Page No.

M/s.Continental exports, M/s.Saha Trades & Exports and M/s.Guru Exports. Therefore, the Learned Senior Counsel for CBI submitted that for the fictitious firms, loans were knowingly sanctioned and the borrowers defaulted. For three of those fictitious firms, the accused had stood guarantee and executed Ex.P-19 (M/s.Continental Exports), Ex.P-39 (M/s.Guru Exports) and Ex.P-41(M/s.Saha Trades & Exports). These evidence are sufficient to prove that, A-1 by abusing his official position had gained pecuniary advantage by cheating, the Indian Overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch, Chennai.

15. Heard the Learned Counsel for the appellants and the Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent/C.B.I and records perused.

16. The undisputed facts in this case are:- M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies consist of partners, who are wife and close blood relatives of A-1 (Lakshmi Narasimhan). The proprietors of other three firms are A-1's friend and A-1's Father and brothers. For M/s.Continental Exports, A-1 recommended for enhancement of loan facilities. He had stood guarantee. Likewise, for M/s.Guru Exports, which is in the name of his brother R.Gurumurthy Page No.14/23

and for M/s.Saha Trades & Exports, which is in the name of his father N.Radhakrishnan, he is the guarantor. The address of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies and M/s.Guru Exports is one and same. Most of the bills produced for discounting, returned unpaid. In a year 2004, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- paid towards the loan account of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies and its sister concerns.

17. Inference from facts proved:- The Inspection Report of P.W.1 (P.Vasanth Rao), marked as Ex.P.22 had recorded the modus operandi adopted by the accused for getting loan and their failure to repay the loan. The documents relied by the prosecution without any doubt proves the beneficiaries in these transactions are the family members of the first accused Mr.Lakshmi Narasimhan. One of his brother by name, R.Surya Narayanan died during trial and his father Mr.N.Radhakrishnan, died pending appeal. The appellants cannot take advantage of the part payment made long after the registration of F.I.R and after the proposal to recover the debt by the Bank. The payment of Rs.5,00,000/- by one Mrs.L.Rajeswari, who is one of the partners of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies and signatory to the loan documents forward to pay part due is not a good reason to get exonerated from the grave charges. Page No.15/23

18. The record show that the loan availed in the year 1992, the wife of A1 had come forward to clear it in the year 2004 much after launching prosecution. The letter of L.Ramani, is only a proposal to the Regional Office to regularise the accounts. It is not a clean chit for either M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies or for M/s.Guru Exports. This letter marked as Ex.D-1 discloses the fact that, the borrowers have no proper account and their accounts are irregular. The fraud has come to light after the death of S.Santhanam, the Chief Manager, during the course of inspection by P.W-1. His inspection report is marked as Ex.P.22. The C.B.I, on registering the complaint had collected evidence and through 68 documents marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-68, the role of A-1 in the crime is established.

19. The submission of the Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent/C.B.I, regarding the letter of guarantee given for the borrowers, false intimation about the credibility of the borrowers to induce the Bank to sanction loan and omission to obtain necessary documents to create security for the loan advanced. False statement regarding stock in trade and functioning of the firms to which the loan extended are established by the prosecution to the core and Page No.16/23

therefore, the trial Court has rightly held the appellants guilty.

20. The appellant in Crl.A.No.343 of 2013 Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan, is a public servant, serving as Assistant Manager in Indian Overseas Bank, Mylapore Branch, Chennai. The appellant in Crl.A.No.359 of 2013 Mr.R.Gurumurthy, is the proprietor of M/s.Guru Exports. He is brother of the 1st appellant Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan. The Current Account for M/s.Guru Exports opened on 03/06/1991. He was introduced by the Chief Manager, S.Santhanam, who died later. He is one of the conspirator to the crime.

21. The cash credit loan against goods hypothecated sanctioned to M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies cleared through the cheques of M/s.Saha Trades & Experts and M/s.Guru Exports. P.W.1 (P.Vasantha Rao), in his report Ex.P-22 had noted that, over and above the cash credit limit, loans were extended to these firms as on 09/11/1991. It has been proved by the prosecution that, the loans sanctioned to other three firms were diverted to the account of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies. To illustrate, the loan of Rs.3 lakhs advanced to M/s.Continental Exports on 23/04/1991, diverted to the credit of M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies, on the very Page No.17/23

next day i.e., 24.04.1991, by remitting Rs.2 lakhs. As already noted, A-1 (Lakshmi Narasimhan) is the guarantor for the loan sanction to L.Muthaiah, the proprietor of M/s.Continental exports. He, in the capacity of Assistant Manager had got his proposals Ex.P-15 and Ex.P-34 to enhance the credit limits approved by the Chief Manager.

22. The inspection conducted by P.W.1 along with L.Ramani disclosed, no stock at the premises of M/s.Continental Exports. The Packing credit loan of Rs.2 lakhs and cash credit loan against goods to tune of Rs.4,45,506/- based on the guarantee letter signed by A-1 for Rs.7 lakhs marked as Ex.P.19. The hypothecation letter for the loan of Rs.4 lakhs signed by L.Muthiah. No other documents like application or request letter for sanction of credit facility available. Therefore, it is very obvious that, even without stock and without application, loan has been sanctioned. By giving a guarantee letter and the loan money had been advanced only to be diverted to the account of M/s.Guru Exports owned by the first appellant in Crl.A.No.359/2013. The very next day, the Current Account of M/s.Continental Agencies closed.

Page No.18/23

23. The proprietary concern of Mr.Gurumurthy, who is the first appellant in C.A.No.359 of 2013, is none other than the brother of the appellant/Lakshmi Narasimhan in C.A.No.343 of 2013. The Current Account in the name of M/s.Guru Exports opened on 03/06/1991. On 19/03/1992, his brother M/s.Lakshmi Narasimhan had stood guarantor for the loan limit of Rs.10 lakhs sanction to M/s.Guru Exports. Ex.P.39 is the document which is the guarantee letter for the cash credit in the name of M/s.Guru Exports. The first Appellant/Mr.Gurumurthy, in C.A.No.359 of 2013, had given letter (Ex.P-38) on 04/09/1991 to the Chief Manager seeking loan stating, he has a contract for exporting garments worth £.6500 which is equal to Indian Rs.2 lakhs. Immediately, the Chief Manager, Late.S.

Santhanam had sanctioned the loan on the same day without any verification of document to show that, really order from foreign buyers been placed to M/s.Guru Exports. Without confirmation order and letter of credit, this loan was sanctioned and Mr.Gurumoorthy (A3), had not paid the loan availed. The account opening form of M/s.Guru Export is marked as Ex.P.35. It does not contain any detail about its Proprietor, except a sign and seal in the space meant for Depositor. In this printed application form, there is a column for details of the person, individual or jointly or a proprietary concern. This Page No.

column is left conspicuously blank. The Appellant/Gurumurthy in C.A.no.359 of 2013, had executed two pro-notes, dated 06/11/1991 in favour of IOB for Rs.5 lakhs and Rs.3 lakhs. In these two pro-notes, he has shown his address as No.105, Kamarajar Avenue Adyar, Madras, wherein, which is the address for M/s.Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies.

24. Through these evidences, it is proved that, Mr.Lakshmi Narasimhan (A1), the Assistant Manager along with Late.S.Santhanam, the Chief Manager was able to manipulate records, by ignoring the guidelines for advancing loans and the instruction received from the Zonal Office to get the security documents before advancing loan. Without due inspection of the premises of the loanees, appellant had sanctioned loan to the firms in which, he had personal interest.

25. The intention of the appellants to cheat the bank right from the inception by deception manifestly seen from records and thus, the evidence satisfies the necessary ingredients to punish them for offence under Section 120-B r/w 420 I.P.C. Also, this Court has no doubt in its mind about the meeting of mind between these appellants and others to cheat the bank in which A-1 Mr.Lakshmi Page No.20/23

Narasimhan serving as Assistant Manager. Pursuant to the conspiracy, the Appellant in C.A.No.343 of 2013 had abused his position as a public servant to obtain pecuniary advantage for his family members and thereby, had committed offence punishable under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C Act, 1988. Therefore, the judgement of the trial Court is uphold.

26. The conviction as well as the sentence passed by the Learned XI Additional Special Judge, (CBI Cases Relating to Bank Financial Institutions), Chennai, in C.C.No.29 of 2005 imposed on Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan (A-1), the appellant in C.A.No.343 of 2013 and R.Gurumurthy (A-3), appellant in C.A.No.359 of 2013 is hereby confirmed.

27. As a result, the Criminal Appeal Nos.343 & 359 of 2013 are dismissed. The trial Court is directed to secure the appellants/accused and commit them to the prison to undergo the remaining period of sentence. The period of imprisonment already undergone by the accused shall be set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.

23.06.2023 Page No.21/23

Index :Yes/No.

Internet :Yes/No.

:Yes/No.

Speaking order/Non-speaking order bsm To,

1. The XI Additional Special Judge for C.B.I cases, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, ACB, CBI, Chennai - 600 006.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page No.22/23

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

bsm Pre-delivery common judgment made in 23.06.2023 Page No.23/23