Limitation For Executing Partition Decree Not Suspended Till Engrossment; Right To Seek Engrossment Subsists During 12-Year Execution Period: Allahabad HC Unilateral Revocation Of Registered Gift Deed Through Sub-Registrar Is Void, Donor Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mediation Cannot Be Forced Upon Unwilling Party In Civil Suits; Consent Of Both Sides Essential: Bombay High Court Unmarried Daughter Not Entitled To Freedom Fighter Pension If Gainfully Employed At Time Of Father's Death: Calcutta High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Denied For Lack Of Formal Divorce From First Marriage: Delhi High Court ONGC Cannot Demand Security From Award Holder After Giving ‘No Objection’ To Withdrawal Of Deposited Amount: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sedative Drugs Like Tramadol Impact Mental Fitness Of Declarant; Bombay High Court Acquits Man Relying On Doubtful Dying Declarations Postal Tracking Report Showing 'Refusal' Not Conclusive Proof Of Service If Denied On Oath: Delhi High Court Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Decide On Legality Of Charging Fees For Downloading FIRs From 'SAANJH' Portal Wife’s Educational Qualifications No Bar To Seeking Maintenance If Actual Employment Is Not Proven: Orissa High Court Mere Telephonic Contact Without Substance Of Conversation Cannot Establish Criminal Conspiracy: Madhya Pradesh High Court Serious Allegations Like HIV/AIDS Imputations Require Corroboration, Cannot Rest Solely On Unsubstantiated Testimony: Karnataka High Court Family Court Cannot Refuse Mutual Consent Divorce Merely Because Parties Are Living Separately 'Without Valid Reason': Kerala High Court Collective Attempts By Advocates To Overbear Presiding Officer Not Protected Professional Conduct: Madras High Court Dismisses Quash Petitions No Legal Evidence Required To Forward A Person To Trial? Rajasthan HC Slams Police For Implicating Accused In NDPS Case Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Accused Must Be Physically Present In Court To Furnish Bonds Under Section 91 BNSS: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Modus Operandi Having Come to the Notice of the Higher Officers, Inspection of the Branch was Carried Out – Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Petitioners in Bank Fraud Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India has affirmed the conviction of T.R. Vijayaraman and B. Kanagarajan, rejecting their Special Leave Petitions against the High Court’s decision which upheld their sentences for conspiracy, fraud, and cheating related to unauthorized banking transactions. The bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal supported the earlier judicial findings in a detailed judgment.

The accusations centered around Sections 120-B (conspiracy), 420 (cheating), and 477(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The case pertains to illicit activities involving unauthorized temporary Demand Overdrafts arranged by bank officials, which benefited various businessmen including the petitioners.

Originating from an FIR by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in 2004, the case details fraudulent transactions at the Indian Bank, Srirangam Branch, Trichy, where funds were irregularly credited without the backing of negotiable instruments, resulting in interest-free advances to the accused. An internal bank inspection in January 2004 unveiled these discrepancies, leading to the immediate rectification of accounts by the implicated parties, indicating acknowledgment of their misconduct.

Direct Benefits: The court observed that the fraudulent transactions were specifically tailored to benefit the petitioners, who promptly rectified their accounts following the inspection, an act that underscored their complicity.

  1. Dismissal of Defenses: Arguments positing that the transactions were standard banking practices were dismissed, with the court underscoring the orchestrated manipulation of banking processes to facilitate these transactions.
  2. Evidence and Conspiracy: Detailed examination by the court showed a clear pattern of collusion between bank officials and the businessmen, aimed at circumventing standard banking norms for personal gain.
  3. Reference to Similar Cases: The dismissal of related SLPs involving co-accused in earlier proceedings affirmed the consistency of judicial appraisal in these matters.

Decision: The Supreme Court, finding no merit in the appeals, confirmed the lower courts’ decisions, mandating the petitioners to surrender within two weeks.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

T.R. Vijayaraman vs. The State of Tamil Nadu

Latest Legal News