Supreme Court of India Ram Narain Popli vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 14 January, 2003 Equivalent citations: AIR 2003 SUPREME COURT 2748, 2003 AIR SCW 3119, 2003 CRI LJ 4801, (2003) 1 SCR 119 (SC), 2003 (1) SCR 119, 2003 (1) SLT 530, 2003 (1) COM LJ 262 SC, 2003 (1) SCALE 171, 2003 (1) ACE 183, 2003 SCC(CRI) 869, (2003) 1 JT 184 (SC), 2003 (1) LRI 327, 2003 (3) SCC 641, 2003 (2) SRJ 359, (2003) 1 SUPREME 537, (2003) 1 SCALE 171, (2003) 3 INDLD 1, (2003) 2 CRIMES 312, (2003) SC CR R 800, (2003) 1 CURCRIR 201, (2003) 1 ALLCRILR 851 CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1097 of 1999 PETITIONER: RAM NARAIN POPLI RESPONDENT: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/01/2003 M.B. SHAH & B.N. AGRAWAL & ARIJIT PASAYAT JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2003(1) SCR 119 The Judgments/Order of the Court were delivered SHAH, J. The entire prosecution version is around the following five transactions entered into by Maruti Udyog Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'MUL'), through United Commercial Bank (hereinafter referred to as "UCO Bank') wherein Harshad S. Mehta A5 is payee or recipient of the amount, which are mentioned hereunder: ___________________________________________________________________________ __ Trans. A5 Dates Days Rate of Amt. Rs. Interest Amount No. From To % Rs. Repaid (Rs) 01. Lent 24.01.91 25.02.91 32 12.75 4,99,45,000 5,58,250 5,05,03,250 to MUL RemarksMUL delivered 35 lacs Units of UTI to A5. 02. Borrow13.03.91 25.03.91 12 16.75 10,11,50,000 5.56,995 10,17,06,200 ed RemarksUCO gave BR to MUL for 70 lacs Units. 03. Borrow 18.03.91 22.03.91 5 21.00 10,83,75,000 3,11,775 10,86,86,775 ed RemarksUCO gave BR to MUL for 75 lacs Units. R.N. POPLI v. C.B.I. [M.B. SHAH, J.] 141 04. Borrow 24.04.91 26.04.91 2 26.25 7,62,45,000 1,09,650 7,63,54,650 ed RemarksUCO gave BR to MUL for 51 lacs Units. 05. Borrow 02.05.91 07.05.91 5 25.00 10,39,50,000 2,99,090 10,42,49,090 ed ___________________________________________________________________________ __________ RemarksNumber of Units not known but only value stated in chargehseet. Undisputedly, (a) the receipt and the payment of amount was for a fixed period; (b) interest rate was fixed and was received or paid as agreed; (c) for the first transaction, before receiving the money, MUL gave UTI units as a security; for 2nd, 3rd and 4th transactions UCO bank issued Banks Receipts (BRs); (d) the transactions are squaredup on fixed date i.e. the amount is repaid on date fixed; (e) commission/brokerage is received and credited by the UCO Bank for which there are credit entries in the account books; (f) there is no loss to the MUL and the UCO Bank; (g) accounts of UCO Bank are audited, no objection is raised by internal or external auditors; and (h) accounts of MUL are also audited and there is no objection raised by the internal or external auditors to such transactions; (i) no suggestion that any accused gained by such transactions except that A5 got loan. On the basis of the aforesaid special features of the prosecution story, the Special Court, Bombay under Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions In Securities) Act, 1992, (hereinafter referred to as the "SCAM Act") in Special Case No.6 of 1994 [RC.2(A)/93ACUVII] tried five accused for the offences of cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery by using forged documents, abuse of public offices and dishonest misappropriation of the public funds under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 409, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 13(lXc) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the PC Act"). Al Pramod Kumar Pritam Lal Manocha, A2 Ambuj Sushil Kumar Jain and A3 Vinayak Narayan Deosthali were separately charged under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act as also under Section 489 of IPC. For being a Bank employee, A4 Ram Narayan Popli was also charged under Section 409 of IPC. A3 in addition was charged for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC for cheating MUL and was also charged under Section 471 read with Sections 467 and 468 of IPC for fradulently and dishonestly using letterheads and BRs of UCO Bank, Hamam Street Branch, Bombay knowing the same to be false and forged documents as also forging certain documents to be used as valuable securities. A5 Harshad Shantilal Mehta was also charged for the offence punishable under Section 403 of IPC. By judgment and order dated 27th/28th September, 1999, the learned Special Judge acquitted accused No.2 and convicted accused Nos.l, 3, 4 and 5 as under: 1. "Al Pramod Kumar Pritam Lal Manocha, A3 Vinayak Narayan Deosthali, A4 Ram Narayan Popli and A5 Harshad Shantilal Mehta are convicted being the parties to criminal conspiracy alongwith Mr. Mohan D. Khandelwal (PW23) between the period of April May,