HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRL. R. C.No. 1673 of 2002 O R D E R: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 31.10.2002 in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2001 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Krishna at Machilipatnam, whereunder and whereby, the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, in judgment, dated 29.12.2000 in C.C. No. 1 of 1996 was confirmed. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present Revision Case may be stated as follows: Accused No.1 started a scheme in the name and style of Sri Kusuma Haranath Mutual Benefit Fund (hereinafter be referred to as “the benefit fund”) at Gudiavada at his house bearing Door No. 11/198 with an intention to encash his reputation for which his son was the Vice-President and three other sons were the Executive Members. The benefit fund was started in the year 1993. The accused made wide publicity in the public to get enrolled themselves as Members of that benefit fund with terms and conditions that each member has to pay Rs.2,000/- per month for a period of 20 months and the prize chit would be drawn every month and the winner would be given a Maruti car and thereafter, the winner need not pay his remaining installments. They also announced cash prizes of Rs.50,000/- for the remaining 40 months and that prize chit would be drawn every month and assured that money so collected from the members would be given after expiry of five years. The accused informed that the funds collected from the Members of the benefit fund would be utilized for opening some technical and general educational institutions at Gudivada and Vijayawada in the month of June 1994 in the name of the Society. They also informed that they would give credit facilities to the members of the Society. Believing the fraudulent and dishonest inducement of the accused, nearly 351 members of various places were enrolled and the accused collected Rs.1,50,75,572/- from time to time and conducted the benefit fund for some months properly. During 1994, Accused No.1 diverted an amount of Rs.57,86,000/-, dishonestly drawn from the bank in his name and his sons’ name and thereafter, Accused No.1 did not establish any educational institutions. On 17.04.1995, P.W.1 and his son presented a report to the Sub-Inspector of Police, and the police registered a case. During the course of investigation, the police seized the xerox copies of the documents from Accused No.1. It came to light that the accused induced the public to join as members of the benefit fund on allurement and diverted more than Rs.57 lacs to their personal use and hence, they are liable for punishment. 3. The case was taken on file by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishna at Machilipatnam against the accused under Section 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and also under Sections 420, 406 and 406 read with 109 IPC. Charges were framed and explained to them, but they pleaded not guilty. 4. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined seven witnesses P.Ws. 1 to 7 and got marked 27 documents. On behalf of the accused, D.W.1 was examined and Ex.D1 was marked. 5. The trial Court, after considering the evidence on record, found Accused Nos.1 to 5 guilty, accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer S.I. for six weeks for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act; R.I. for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default to suffer S.I. for nine weeks for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. Accused No.1 was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for eight weeks for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC. Similarly, Accused Nos. 2 to 5 were sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each in default to suffer S.I. for eight weeks for the offence punishable under Section 406 read with 109 IPC. Challenging the same, the accused filed Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2001, wherein the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court was confirmed. Hence, the present Criminal Revision Case has been filed. 6. Now the point for determination is whether the judgments of the two Courts below are correct, proper and legal. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners-Accused contended that there was no evidence at all to show that Accused Nos. 2 to 5 participated in the chit transactions or that they have lured the public with a dishonest and fraudulent intention to collect huge money. He further contended that the petitioners gave 20 Maruti cars to the prize winners, personal loans to the depositors and thus, refunded the entire amount collected from the subscribers and there was no complaint whatsoever against the accused and that out of 25 witnesses, who are the members of the benefit fund, only three witnesses were examined and the non-examination of the other witnesses is fatal to the case of the prosecution and, therefore, he prays to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused. 8. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the Public Prosecutor opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that the findings given by the Courts below are based upon proper appreciation of the evidence on record and therefore, the same need not be interfered with. The learned counsel further contended that Accused Nos. 2 to 5 have withdrawn the amounts, without there being any authorization, from the funds of the Society in which they are Executive Members, and that none of the findings given by the Courts below is shown to be perverse or contrary to law and therefore, there are absolutely no grounds to interfere with the same. 9. There cannot be any dispute that the revisional powers of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are truncated one. Unless the findings are shown to be illegal or incorrect or perverse, normally this Court will not interfere with the findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below. A finding can be said to be perverse when it is not based upon any legal evidence available on record or inadmissible evidence has been taken into consideration. 10. During the pendency of this Criminal Revision Case, Petitioners No.1 and 2/A1 and A2 died. Therefore, the Revision Case can be dismissed against them as abated. 11. In this Case, the Court is concerned only with the acts alleged against petitioners No.3 to 5, who are shown as Accused Nos. 3 to 5 in the trial Court. Now it has to be seen whether the findings of the trial Court are based upon any evidence or not. The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that Accused Nos. 2 to 5 are the sons of Accused No.1, who started a Society known as Sri Kusuma Haranatha Mutual Benefit Fund at Gudivada and collected Rs.1.05 crores from all members and it is Accused No.1, who assured that educational institution would be started at Gudivada and Vijayawada by the end of 1994. P.W.1 also stated that Accused No.1 refused to convene the meeting of the Society and, therefore, he lodged the complaint. His evidence would further go to show that the objects for which the Society has been established, have not been fulfilled by Accused No.1. According to him, Accused No.1 purchased in his name the land in an extent of Ac.7.00 and the car purchased to the Society is being used by all the accused for their personal use till today. Exs.P.13 to P.16 are the extracts of the sale deeds which stand in the name of Accused No.1. None of the prosecution witnesses speaks about any overt acts against Accused Nos. 3 to 5. However, the trial Court, based on the documents available on record, found Petitioners No. 3 to 5 guilty. As per Ex.P5 loans list, family members of Accused No.1 received an amount of Rs.64,19,997/-. It is not in dispute that in Exs.P10 and D1, the scheme started by Accused No.1 with regard to the raising of funds from the members of the Society was clearly recited. One of the functions of the Society was to commence educational institutions at Guntur and Vijayawada by the end of 1994, but the said purpose has not been fulfilled. It is also not in dispute that Accused Nos. 2 to 5 were the Executive Members of the Society. Therefore, the acts of Accused No.1 would certainly bind on his sons, who are, admittedly, the Executive Members. When Accused No.1 purchased Ac.7.00 of land under various sale deeds marked as Exs.P.11 to P.16, Rs.57 lacs and above has been withdrawn by him and his family members from the funds of the Society, without producing any security. From Ex.P1, it is clear that P.W.1 and his son took an amount of Rs.1 lac by giving security. As seen from Ex.P6, the object of the Society was to create credit facilities, provide recreation and other facilities to all its members and Accused No.1 was the President, Accused No.2 was the Vice President and Accused Nos. 3 to 5 were the members of the Society. 12. The evidence of P.W.2 would go to show that no meeting was held, no accounts were furnished to the members and some of the committee members told that the accused took the loan from the Scheme for the purpose of starting a spinning mill. The evidence of P.W.3 would also go to show that in spite of giving requisition under Ex.P7 to convene a meeting and to render accounts, no such meeting was convened. Ex.P17 is the SB Account of Sri Kusuma Haranath Mutual Benefit Fund. It was opened on 09.06.1983 and operated till 04.11.1993. As per Ex.P5 loan list, the family members of Accused No.1 received loan to a tune of Rs.64 lacs, whereas the other members were given only below Rs.1 lac. The scheme was though started by Accused No.1, Accused Nos. 2 to 5, being the members of the benefit fund, are equally bound by the acts of the President. In view of the fact that the members i.e. Accused Nos. 2 to 5 are none other than the sons of the President, they knew fully well the transactions made by Accused No.1 with regard to the illegal withdrawal of monies from the account of the benefit fund without there being any security and misutilized the same for the purposes other than the one for which the benefit fund was started. Therefore, both the Courts below rightly found the petitioners guilty and none of the findings is shown to be perverse or contrary to law. 13. In the absence of any illegality in the judgments of the Courts below, the Criminal Revision case is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed insofar as Petitioners No. 3 to 5 are concerned. Insofar as Petitioners No.1 and 2 are concerned, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as abated. The convictions and sentences imposed against Petitioners No. 3 to 5/Accused Nos. 3 to 5 in C.C. No. 1 of 1996 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate- cum-I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam for the offences punishable under Section 4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, Sections 420 and 406 read with 109 IPC., as confirmed by the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Machilipatnam in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2001, are confirmed. --------------------- (K.C. BHANU, J) 11th August 2009 ksld