Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 337 (AP)

Chetkuru Srisailam v. State

2009-05-13

B.CHANDRA KUMAR

body2009
ORDER These petitions are filed under Section 437 Cr.P.C. seeking bail to the petitioners/A-8 and A-9 in C.C.No. 187 of20090n the file of the XIV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner in Crl.P.No. 31920f2009 is A-8 and the petitioner in CrI.P.No. 3194 of 2009 is A-9 in C.C.No. 187 of 2009 on the file of the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 3. The Superintendent of Police, CBI, Hyderabad has filed the charge sheet against the petitioners and others alleging that they have committed the offences of conspiracy, cheating, cheating by personation, generating forged valuable securities, forging the documents for the purpose of cheating and knowingly using the forged documents of genuine. It is also alleged that they have also falsified the accounts of Mis. Satyan Computers Service Limited (for shot M/s. SCSL') and also caused disappearance of evidence of the offences to screen themselves from legal punishment. He charges leveled against the petitioners and others accused are under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 419,467 46B, 471, 477-A and 201 IPC. 4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI Sri. T. Niranjan Reddy submitted that though the charge sheet has been filed, a petition for scientific interrogation of A-1 to A-3 is filed and that further investigation with regard to diversification and misappropriation of funds is in progress. 5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the petitioners Sri. G. Mahesh Reddy argued that the petitioners are only the employees of Mis. SCSL and that they are not the Directors and they have no control over the affairs of the company. It is further submitted that they have no role in the commission of the offences or in inflating the figures of the company. It is also submitted that the prosecution case itself is that the main accused have inflated the figures and shown the non-existent cash in the bank balance of the company and when the nonexistent cash is shown as existing cash, the question of misappropriation or diversification of funds would not arise. It is also submitted that the prosecution case itself is that the main accused have inflated the figures and shown the non-existent cash in the bank balance of the company and when the nonexistent cash is shown as existing cash, the question of misappropriation or diversification of funds would not arise. It is also submitted that the petitioners were available for investigation even prior to their arrest and the entire investigation has been completed and that all the material witnesses have been examined and all the material documents have been collected by the investigating agency and that at present the petitioners are not working in the company and that the company is also not under the control of any of the accused and the Central Government has appointed Directors to the Company who are looking after the affairs of the company at present and therefore the question of tampering the evidence would not arise. It is also submitted that 164 Cr.P.C. statements of material witness have already been recorded and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners in jail. 6. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI, Hyderabad submitted that though the charge sheet has been filed but still further investigation is being done to find out how the money of the company has been misappropriated. It is argued that the petitioners have conspired with other accused for the commission of the offences and that the petitioners being conspirators are liable for all the acts done by other accused. It is also submitted that further investigation is going on and if the petitioners are enlarged on bail at this stage, they may temper the evidence and hamper further investigation. 7. As far as A-8 is concerned the following allegations are made against him in the charge sheet; A-9 is the Senior Manager (Finance) of M/s. SCSL and he was looking after the treasury department during in the relevant period. He along with A-7 in furtherance of the conspiracy, used to hand over the forged monthly statements of the banks to P. Gyana Prasad and A-9 for making reconciliation and entries into the Oracel Financials system knowing fully well that the monthly statements of the banks being provided were forged. He along with A-7 in furtherance of the conspiracy, used to hand over the forged monthly statements of the banks to P. Gyana Prasad and A-9 for making reconciliation and entries into the Oracel Financials system knowing fully well that the monthly statements of the banks being provided were forged. The spouse of A-8 is one of the 17 persons through whom the promoters sold their shares in the open market in the year 2000 and this shows the complicity in off loading the shares at opportune time. A-8 also received shares under ASOP-A scheme out of turn over a prolonged period and these shares were allotted by A-1 to A-3 showing the complicity of A-8 in furtherance of their conspiracy. Several incriminating electronic records were retrieved from his laptop, which clearly shows that he had a clear role in this well knit conspiracy. Letters pertaining to fake FDRs and forged monthly bank statements were recovered from his laptop and GRQD opinion was received in this regard. A-8 was in charge of the treasury team of finance division which is responsible for handling the cheques of Mis. SCSL and even though he has received several cheques for Rs. 1425 crores during the period 2006 to 2008 from 37 companies and deposited the same in the accounts of M/s. SCSL, he failed to reflect the same in the books of accounts of M/s. SCSL and instead he got the same reflected wrongly as part of the conspiracy as if these monies were received towards sale proceeds from Bank of Baroda, New York Branch with the help of his subordinates. The statement of one P. Gyana Prasad got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. clearly mentions about the role played by A-8. 8. As far as A-9 is concerned the following specific allegations are made in the charge sheet: A-9 is the Assistant Manager (Finance) and in charge of sales and AR in Ms. SCSL during the relevant period. He got created 7561 falsified sales invoices in IMS through Admin role and by utilizing the super user facility has clandestinely got them hidden from the business circles. He got the data fed into the systems. These invoices, which were generated in IMS were exported to Oracel Financials from where the annual financial statements were generated reflecting the inflation of sales on account of these falsified sales invoices. He got the data fed into the systems. These invoices, which were generated in IMS were exported to Oracel Financials from where the annual financial statements were generated reflecting the inflation of sales on account of these falsified sales invoices. He got the super user facility and got created in IMS in order to generate these false sales invoices by communicating with the internal information systems Division of Ms. SCSL. He also received shares under ASOP-A scheme out of turn over a prolonged period and these shares were allotted by A-1 to A-3, which shows his complicity in the commission of offences in furtherance of the conspiracy. From the laptopA-9 several incriminating electronic records pertaining to the falsified invoices and super user features were recovered through computer forensic examination at GEQD. He has also instructed his subordinates to delete the electronic records and reverse certain entries in the Oracel Financials after the aborted Maytas deal. He also instructed his subordinates to generate the false invoice and store the data in the server HMF NT 01 0 and several incriminating electronic records were retrieved from the server HMF NT 010 with the help of GEQD experts. Further A-9 was also providing data like invoice numbers, customers' names and the amounts to enable his subordinates to generate the false invoices. He was clandestinely omitting certain numbers in the invoice number series in order to use these missing numbers for generating false invoices at a future data thereby interspersing the false invoices in the regular series. He has also corresponded with the internal information System Division to hide certain invoices and also to reverse the fields invoice status of certain other invoices from visible to invisible and vice-versa. Knowing fully well he has got the details pertaining to the fake invoices entered into oracle financials through his team thereby inflating the balance sheet. He got several false invoices generated without actually receiving the billing advises from the financial in charges of respective business circles. 9. Statement is Sri. K. Malia Reddy and PBV Suresh Kumar got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. clearly shows the role played by A-9 in the fraud. 10. He got several false invoices generated without actually receiving the billing advises from the financial in charges of respective business circles. 9. Statement is Sri. K. Malia Reddy and PBV Suresh Kumar got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. clearly shows the role played by A-9 in the fraud. 10. The investigation also revealed that various investors who had invested in the shares of M/s. SCSL have sustained loss heavily due to the drop in the prices of shares of M/s. SCSL after disclosure of this fraud committed by the accused and that the Public Sector bank have sustained loss to a tune of Rs. 10.13 crores and the LIC of India alone sustained loss to a tune of Rs. 950 crores. 11. The nature of the offence, its gravity and its impact on the society and larger interest of public are some of the important factors, which have to be taken into consideration while considering bail applications. One of the paramount aspect to be taken into consideration is the personal liberty of the petitioners (accused.) At the same time the magnitude of the economic offence and its impact and injury caused to the national economy and national prestige have to be taken into consideration. The large number of persons being affected cannot be ignored. Though it appears that a part of investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed according to the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI, a petition for further scientific investigation of A-1 to A-3 is pending and further investigation is being done to know how the funds have been misappropriated. It is also submitted that after further investigation some important evidence and documents may be filed. It is also submitted that if at this stage, the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may tamper the evidence and hamper further investigation. 12. Since it is submitted that further investigation is being done, it may not be desirable to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. More over the accusation appears to be well founded, the witnesses must be free from being influenced and threatened; otherwise they may not feel secure to depose freely. Free movement of the accused particularly the influential accused involved in multi crores white color economic offences may influence the witnesses and their presence itself may create apprehension to the witnesses. More over the accusation appears to be well founded, the witnesses must be free from being influenced and threatened; otherwise they may not feel secure to depose freely. Free movement of the accused particularly the influential accused involved in multi crores white color economic offences may influence the witnesses and their presence itself may create apprehension to the witnesses. In that view of the matter, I find force in the contention of the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may tamper the evidence and hamper further investigation. 13. In the result, I find no grounds to grant bail to the petitioners. The petitions are accordingly dismissed.