Bangalore District Court
Vishwanath H S vs Subramanya Konunouru Alias Subramanya … on 12 August, 2025
KABC030592132019
Presented on : 17-08-2019
Registered on : 17-08-2019
Decided on : 12-08-2025
Duration : 5 years, 11 months, 26 days
IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 12th day of August 2025
Present:-
Sri.SOMANATHA, B.A. (Law), L.L.B.,
IV Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru.
CC NO.18759/2019
Complainant State by Halasuru Police Station,
V/s.
Accused
1) Sri. Subramanya Konanur @
Subramanya Konanur,
R/at No.15, Old No.4259,
20th Main, 'A' Block,
Subramanyanagara,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by Sri. P.L.S., Advocate)
2) Sri. Suresh Malya(Split up)
- 2 -- CC-18759/2019
Date of Report of Offence : 01-12-2017
Date of filing Charge Sheet : 11-01-2019
Name of the Complainant : Sri. H.S.Viswanath
Offences complained of : Sections 406, 418, 419, 420
& 120B r/w. 34 of IPC
Date of commencing of recording
Evidence : 30-12-2021
Date of closing of Evidence : 24-06-2025
Opinion of the Judge : Accused No.1 is convicted.
*******
JUDGMENT
This case is arose out of Crime No.390/2017 of Basavanagudi
Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections
406, 418, 419, 420 and 120B r/w. 34 of IPC based on the gist of
facts stated in the FIR which has set this criminal case in motion
against the accused persons.
2. The case of the prosecution is that complainant was running
a company named Vatsala Construction and consultancy company
in the First Floor, No.32, 2nd Main Road, N.R. Colony, Bengaluru for
the last 25 years, Vatsala Construction and Consultancy company
was carrying on civil construction work while accused No.1 working
– 3 — CC-18759/2019
as Director of the complainant company by gaining access to the
information and record of the account bearing
No.126100301000408 of Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazar Main Road,
Basavanagudi, Bengaluru he conspired with accused No.2 opened
a new account bearing No.126106021000048 in the name of
complainant company and thereafter an amount of Rs.30,00,000/-
to be received from his M/s. Ingenuitas Software Private Limited
and M/s. Sipani Properties Private Limited transferred to the fake
account No.126106021000048, having knowledge that he is no
longer Director of the company and the power of subscribing
signature on accounts operate authorization came to an end on 18-
11-2014, the accused No.1 got honored the cheque bearing
No.327829 of Rs.20,00,000/- of company Bank account
No.126100301000408 with the help of accused No.2. Accused
No.1 knows very well that any transaction should be done after
obtaining signature of the complainant and accused No.1, the
accused No.2 with an intention to cause wrongful gain to the
complainant honored the cheque solely signed by accused No.1.
The accused No.1 misused the company fund and the funds
required to be credited to the complainant company from his M/s.
– 4 — CC-18759/2019
Ingenuitas Software Private Limited and M/s. Sipani Properties
Private Limited.
3. The Basavanagudi police had booked the case against the
accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 406,
418, 419, 420 and 120B r/w. 34 of IPC based on the written
complaint of Sri. H.S.Viswanath. The Investigating Officer
registered the FIR, prepared the spot panchanamas by visiting the
crime scene and recorded the statement of witnesses, collected the
documents. Having material in the investigation, Investigating
Officer filed charge sheet against the accused persons for the
offences alleged.
4. Upon receipt of the court summons, the accused No.1 entered
appearance before the court. The relevant copies have been
furnished under Section 207 of Cr. P.C. to the accused No.1. The
charge for the offences under Sections 406, 418, 419, 420 and
120B r/w. 34 of IPC framed, explained and read over to the
accused No.1 before the court. Upon which accused No.1 has
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried before the court.
– 5 — CC-18759/2019
5. In the instant case, the prosecution examined CW.1 as PW.1,
CW.2 as PW.2, CW.3 as PW.3, CW.4 as PW.4, CW.5 as PW.5, and
got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.26 and Ex.D.1 and 2. Evidence on
prosecution side was closed.
6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the 313 statement
was read over and explained to the accused No.1 in Kannada
language. The accused No.1 has denied the incriminating evidence
available on record as false. The accused No.1 has not adduced
defence evidence.
7. Heard. Defense counsel filed written arguments. Perused the
material available on record.
8. The points that arises for the consideration are :
1) ಮೊದಲನೆಯದಾಗಿ, 1ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಬಸವನಗುಡಿ ಪೊಲೀಸ್
ಠಾಣಾ ಸರಹದ್ದು ಎನ್.ಆರ್. ಕಾಲೋನಿ, 2ನೇ ಮುಖ್ಯ ರಸ್ತೆ, ನಂ.32,
1ನೇ ಮಹಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಮಾಲೀಕತ್ವದಲ್ಲಿರುವ ವತ್ಸಲಾ ಕನ್
ಸ್ಟ್ರಕ್ಷನ್ ಮತ್ತು ಕನ್ಸಲ್ಟೆನ್ಸಿ ಎಂಬ ಕಂಪನಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಡೈರೆಕ್ಟರ್ ಆಗಿ
ನೇಮಕಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದು, 2014ರ ಜನವರಿ ತಿಂಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಈಗಾಗಲೇ
ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ವ್ಯವಹಾರಕ್ಕೆ ಬಸವನಗುಡಿ
ಗಾಂಧೀಬಜಾರ್ ಮುಖ್ಯರಸ್ತೆಯ ವಿಜಯ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ನಲ್ಲಿ ತೆರೆದಿದ್ದ ಖಾತೆ
ನಂ.126100301000408 ಗೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಿಸಿದ ಮಾಹಿತಿ ಹಾಗೂ
ದಾಖಲಾತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಪಡೆದುಕೊಂಡು ಕಂಪನಿಗೆ ಮೋಸ ಮಾಡುವ
ದುರುದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ಪ್ರತ್ಯೇಕಿತ 2ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯೊಂದಿಗೆ ಶಾಮೀಲಾಗಿ
ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.1261060210048
ತೆರೆದು ಸದರಿ ಕಂಪನಿಯಿಂದ ಎರಡು ಪ್ರಾಜೆಕ್ಟ್ ಗಳನ್ನು
ಮಾಡಿಕೊಟ್ಟಿದ್ದ ಸಂಬಂಧ M/s. Ingenuitas Software Pvt.
– 6 — CC-18759/2019
Ltd. ಮತ್ತು M/s. Sipani Properties Pvt. Ltd. ಕಂಪನಿಗಳಿಂದ
ಬರಬೇಕಾಗಿದ್ದ ಒಟ್ಟು 30,00,000/- ರೂಹಣವನ್ನು ನಕಲು ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.
1261060210048 ಗೆ 2ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಸಹಾಯದಿಂದ
ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ವರ್ಗಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದು,
ಅದಲ್ಲದೇ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ತೆರೆದಿದ್ದ ವಿಜಯ
ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.126100301000408 ಗೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಿಸಿದಂತೆ
Accounts Operate Authorisation ಸಹಿ ಮಾಡುವ ಅಧಿಕಾರ
ದಿನಾಂಕಃ18.11.2014 ರಂದು ಕೊನೆಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದರೂ ಸಹ ಕಂಪನಿಯ
ನಿರ್ದೇಶಕನಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೂ ಸಹ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ನಿರ್ದೇಶಕನೆಂದು ನಂಬಿಸಿ
ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ ಖಾತೆ
ನಂ.126100301000408 ನ ಚೆಕ್ ನಂ.327828 ಗೆ ನಿಮ್ಮ
ಸಹಿಯನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿ 20,00,000/- ರೂ ಮೌಲ್ಯದ ಚೆಕ್ ನ್ನು 2ನೇ
ಆರೋಪಿ ಸಹಾಯದಿಂದ ಪಾಸ್ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ಅಕ್ರಮ ಲಾಭ
ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡಿರುತ್ತೀರಿ ಮತ್ತು ಸದರಿ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ಖಾತೆಯು ಜಂಟಿ
ಆಪರೇಷನ್ ಆಗಿದ್ದು ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಸಹಿ ಮತ್ತು ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಸಹಿ
ಇದ್ದರೆ ಮಾತ್ರ ವ್ಯವಹಾರ ನಡೆಸಬೇಕಿದ್ದು, ಸದರಿ ಖಾತೆಗೆ ನಿಮ್ಮ
ಆಥರೈಸೇಷನ್ ಸಹಿಯ ದಿನಾಂಕಃ 18.11.2014 ರಂದು
ಕೊನೆಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದ ವಿಷಯ ಗೊತ್ತಿದ್ದರು ಸಹ 2ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು 1ನೇ
ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಸಹಾಯ ಮಾಡುವ ಉದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ಮೊದಲೇ
ಚಿತಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ಕೇವಲ 1ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಸಹಿಯಿದ್ದ
ಚೆಕ್ ಪಾಸ್ ಮಾಡಿ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರಿಗೆ ಅಕ್ರಮ ನಷ್ಟವನ್ನುಂಟು ಮಾಡಿ
ನಂಬಿಕೆ ದ್ರೋಹ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು, ಕಾರಣ ಭಾ.ದಂ.ಸಂ ಕಲಂ 406
ಸಹವಾಚಕ 34 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಅಪರಾಧಗಳನ್ನೆಸಗಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು
ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆಯು ನಿಸ್ಸಂಶಯವಾಗಿ ರುಜುವಾತು ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಯೆ?
2) ಎರಡನೆಯದಾಗಿ ಮೇಲ್ಕಂಡ, ದಿನಾಂಕ ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥಳದಲ್ಲಿ 1ನೇ
ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಗೆ ಅಕ್ರಮ ನಷ್ಟವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ
ಎಂದು ತಿಳಿದೂ ಸಹ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ನಕಲಿ ಖಾತೆಯನ್ನು
ತೆರೆದು ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಗೆ ಬರಬೇಕಿದ್ದ ಹಣವನ್ನು ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ
ವರ್ಗಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ಅಕ್ರಮ ನಷ್ಟವುಂಟು ಮಾಡಿ ಮೋಸ
ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು, ಕಾರಣ ಭಾ.ದಂ.ಸಂ ಕಲಂ 418 ಸಹವಾಚಕ 34 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ
ಅಪರಾಧಗಳನ್ನೆಸಗಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆಯು ನಿಸ್ಸಂಶಯವಾಗಿ
ರುಜುವಾತು ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಯೆ?
3) ಮೂರನೆಯದಾಗಿ ಮೇಲ್ಕಂಡ, ದಿನಾಂಕ ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥಳದಲ್ಲಿ
1ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ತೆರೆದಿದ್ದ
ವಿಜಯ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.126100301000408 ಗೆ
ಸಂಬಂಧಿಸಿದಂತೆ Accounts Operate Authorisation ಸಹಿ
– 7 — CC-18759/2019
ಮಾಡುವ ಅಧಿಕಾರ ದಿನಾಂಕಃ18.11.2014 ರಂದು
ಕೊನೆಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದರೂ ಸಹ ಕಂಪನಿಯ ನಿರ್ದೇಶಕನಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೂ ಸಹ
ಕಂಪನಿಯ ನಿರ್ದೇಶಕನೆಂದು ನಂಬಿಸಿ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ ಕಂಪನಿಯ
ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.126100301000408 ನ ಚೆಕ್ ನಂ.327828
ಗೆ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಸಹಿಯನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು, ಕಾರಣ ಭಾ.ದಂ.ಸಂ ಕಲಂ 419
ಸಹವಾಚಕ 34 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಅಪರಾಧಗಳನ್ನೆಸಗಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು
ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆಯು ನಿಸ್ಸಂಶಯವಾಗಿ ರುಜುವಾತು ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಯೆ?
4) ನಾಲ್ಕನೆಯದಾಗಿ ಮೇಲ್ಕಂಡ, ದಿನಾಂಕ ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥಳದಲ್ಲಿ 1ನೇ
ಆರೋಪಿಯು 2ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯೊಂದಿಗೆ ಶಾಮೀಲಾಗಿ ಕಂಪನಿಯ
ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ತೆರೆದಿದ್ದ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.126100301000408
ಖಾತೆಯ ಮಾಹಿತಿ ದಾಖಲಾತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಪಡೆದುಕೊಂಡು ಕಂಪನಿಯ
ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ತೆರೆದಿದ್ದ ನಕಲಿ ಖಾತೆ ನಂ.1261060210048 ತೆರೆದು ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-
1 ರವರಿಗೆ ಕಂಪನಿಗಳಿಂದ ಬರಬೇಕಾಗಿದ್ದ ಹಣ ಮತ್ತು ಖಾತೆಯಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ
ಹಣವನ್ನು ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ವರ್ಗಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ನಷ್ಟವುಂಟು
ಮಾಡಿ ಮೋಸ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು, ಕಾರಣ ಭಾ.ದಂ.ಸಂ ಕಲಂ 420
ಸಹವಾಚಕ 34 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಅಪರಾಧಗಳನ್ನೆಸಗಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು
ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆಯು ನಿಸ್ಸಂಶಯವಾಗಿ ರುಜುವಾತು ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಯೆ?
5) ಕೊನೆಯದಾಗಿ ಮೇಲ್ಕಂಡ, ದಿನಾಂಕ ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥಳದಲ್ಲಿ 1ನೇ
ಆರೋಪಿಯು 2ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯೊಂದಿಗೆ ಶಾಮೀಲಾಗಿ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-1 ರವರ
ಕಂಪನಿಗೆ ಮೋಸ ಮಾಡಿ ಅಕ್ರಮ ಲಾಭ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ನಷ್ಟವುಂಟು
ಮಾಡುವ ಉದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ಅಪರಾಧಿಕ ಒಳಸಂಚು ರೂಪಿಸಿದ್ದು,
ಕಾರಣ ಭಾ.ದಂ.ಸಂ ಕಲಂ 120-ಬಿ ಸಹವಾಚಕ 34 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ
ಅಪರಾಧಗಳನ್ನೆಸಗಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆಯು ನಿಸ್ಸಂಶಯವಾಗಿ
ರುಜುವಾತು ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಯೆ?
6) ಏನು ಆದೇಶ?
9. The findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1:- IN THE AFFIRMATIVE
Point No.2:- IN THE AFFIRMATIVE
Point No.3:- IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.4:- IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.5:- IN THE AFFIRMATIVE
Point No.6:- As per final order for the following:-
- 8 -- CC-18759/2019
REASONS
10. Point No.1 to 5:- All these points require common discussion.
As the findings to be given on particular point has the direct
bearing on other points. Therefore, so as to avoid the repetition of
discussion and conclusion. I have taken all these points for
consideration at one stretch.
11. Police booked case against the accused No.1 and 2 for the
offences punishable under Sections 406, 418, 419, 420 and 120-B
r/w. 34 of IPC on the basis of the complaint lodged by Managing
Director of Vatsala Construction and Consultancy company
(VCCPL), accused No.1 said to be director of the (VCCPL), accused
No.2 said to be Manager of the Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazar Branch,
Basavangudi Branch, Bengaluru, a separate split criminal case
registered against the accused No.2 – Manager of the Vijaya Bank,
Gandhi Bazar Branch, Basavangudi Branch, Bengaluru, In the
instant case, accused No.1 tried for the offences alleged by the
prosecution.
12. Complainant-Managing Director of Vatsala Construction and
Consultancy company (VCCPL), the then Manager and Assistant
– 9 — CC-18759/2019
Manager of Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazar Branch, Basavangudi
Branch, Bengaluru, PSI who registered the crime and PI – who
investigated into the offence have been examined before the court.
13. The complaint, resolution passed at a meeting of Board of
Director of (VCCPL) dated 30-01-2014, Account opening form,
cheque, letter of intents, Bank statement, Ombudsman report and
minutes of the meetings of Board of Directors of (VCCPL) dated
03.02.2014 and mail message are produced for the inspection of
the court.
14. There can be no dispute that the complainant company M/s.
Vatsala Construction and Consultancy put in civil construction
work, accused No.1 was the Director of M/s. Ingenuitas Software
Private Limited, the complainant company had decided to build two
Apartments in Koramangala and Atti bele as demanded by the M/s.
Sipani Properties Private Limited, the construction work was
entrusted to accused No.1-Director of M/s. Ingenuitas Software
Private Limited, it is the stipulation of the agreement that accused
No.1 shall invest all money to do construction work and the profit
shall be equally divided among the complainant company and
accused No.1’s company, when the complainant had been to the
– 10- – CC-18759/2019
USA, he had permitted to accused No.1 do all financial transactions
during August-2014 to November-2014.
15. The complainant said that accused No.1 was a Additional
Director of Vatsala Construction and Consultancy company
whereas the accused No.1 said that he was appointed as Director of
the Vatsala Construction and Consultancy company. Accused No.1
was appointed as Additional Director of Vatsala Construction and
Consultancy company vide Resolution passed at a meeting of Board
of Director of (VCCPL) dated 30.01.2014. Accused No.1 was
appointed as Director of Vatsala Construction and Consultancy
company vide minutes of the meetings of Board of Directors of
(VCCPL) dated 03.02.2014. Subsequent resolution passed in the
meeting of the Board of Directors suggests that the accused No.1
was appointed as Director of Vatsala Construction and
Consultancy company. Thereby, I am of the opinion that the
accused No.1 was a Director of Vatsala Construction and
Consultancy company during relevant period.
16. The incident was happened between the period of December-
2014 to January-2015. The incident came to the knowledge of the
– 11- – CC-18759/2019
complainant in the month of May-2015. Ombudsman report
received on 05.12.2016. The police complaint was lodged on
14.09.2017. The complainant fairly admits there is a little delay in
filing the complaint before the police station. There is no defense
that delay in filing complaint caused miscarriages of justice to the
accused. Some short of delay in filing complaint cannot be a
ground to discredit the whole prosecution version. Thereby,
prosecution case cannot be doubted on the ground of delay.
17. Though the complainant admits original suit bearing
No.6976/2017 instituted by the accused for recovery of
Rs.35,00,000/- against him is pending for adjudication he clearly
denied that police complaint was lodged after the institution of the
said money recovery suit. There is no document to substantiate
that the suit was instituted much earlier to lodging the police.
Things stood thus, court cannot opine that complainant had lodged
the police complaint counter blast to the money recovery suit
instituted by the accused.
18. The three serious allegations made against the accused No.1
are as follows:
– 12- – CC-18759/2019
(a) Accused No.1 solely signed the new account opening
form in order to open fake OD Account bearing
No.126106021000048.
(b) Accused No.1 got transferred complainant company
amount of Rs.20,00,000/- to the fake account bearing
No.126100301000408.
(c) Accused No.1 transferred an amount of
Rs.30,00,000/- from Sipani Properties and Developers to
fake account bearing No.126106021000048.
19. Complainant evidence has deposed that accused No.1
conspired with accused No.2 opened a new account between the
period of December-2014 till January-2015. The resolutions passed
at the meeting of the Board of Directors clearly reflect that
complainant and accused No.1 both should sign for all transactions
pertaining to the new current account to be opened in the Vijaya
Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. As per
the current account opening form the complainant and accused
No.1 jointly opened the Bank account in the name of VCCPL in
Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru.
There can be no dispute that complainant maintained a dedicated
account bearing No.126100301000408 at Vijaya Bank, Gandhi
Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. Bank Statement of
– 13- – CC-18759/2019
account bearing No. 126106021000048 maintained at Vijaya Bank,
Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru would show that
accused No.1 only opened new OD account bearing No.
126106021000048 at Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch,
Basavanagudi, Bengaluru in the name of VCCPL. Thereby, it is
crystal clear that Accused No.1 conspired with accused No.2
opened fake OD account.
20. It has come in the evidence of the complainant that accused
No.1 conspired with accused No.2 transferred the amount require
to be received to the Vatsala Construction and Consultancy to the
OD account No.48. An amount of Rs.20,00,000/- transferred from
the company account No.408 to the OD Account No.48 with sole
signature of accused No.1 on 27.04.2015. Cheque bearing
No.327829 drawn on Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch,
Basavanagudi, Bengaluru dated 27.04.2015 contains signature of
the accused No.1 only. Nowhere, accused No.1 disputes his
signature found on the afore-mentioned cheque. Bank Statement
would show that an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- credited to the new
Bank account bearing No. 126106021000048 of Vijaya Bank,
Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru on 27-04-2015.
- 14- - CC-18759/2019 Thereby, prosecution able to demonstrate that Accused No.1
conspired with accused No.2 got transferred an amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- of complainant company to the fake account on
27.04.2015.
21. Complainant tendered evidence that how much amount
transferred from Sipani Properties and Developers to OD account
No.48 was came to the knowledge of the complainant upon going
through the Bank statement of Account bearing
No.126106021000048 maintained at Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar
Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. Complainant has alleged that
the accused No.1 conspired with accused No.2 opened a new
account No. 126106021000048 in the name of complainant
company and thereafter an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- to be
received from his own M/s. Ingenuitas Software Private Limited,
and M/s. Sipani Properties Private Limited, transferred to the fake
account No.126106021000048 The letter of intents would
demonstrate that complainant company had agreed to construct
the Apartment buildings to the M/s. Sipani Properties Private
Limited.
– 15- – CC-18759/2019
22. An amount of Rs.9,80,000/- transferred on 02.06.2015, an
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- transferred on 06.07.2015, another
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- transferred on 17.05.2015 and one more
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- transferred on 27.07.2015 from M/s.
Sipani Properties Private Limited to the account bearing
No.12610030100048 standing in the of accused No.1 on behalf of
Vatsala Constructions and Consultancy at Vijaya Bank, Gandhi
Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. From the above, the
prosecution has shown how much amount was transferred from
Sipani Properties and Developers to OD account No.48 by
producing the Bank statement of Account bearing No.
126106021000048 maintained at Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar
Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru.
23. Complainant also deposed that he lodged complaint against
the accused persons regarding funds transfer to the RBI
Ombudsman. The Ombudsman found fault with bank for opening
the OD account No.48 without collecting the KYC documents and
thereafter, he had imposed fine to the bank. Since a big amount
i.e., Rs.20,00,000/- transferred from the complainant company
account fake account he advised to lodged police complaint.
– 16- – CC-18759/2019
According to the report of the Ombudsman of RBI, as regards the
third disputed cheque transaction for Rs.20.00 Lakh it is observed
that the cheque dated 27.04.2015 was signed only by Mr.Konanur.
As per the extract Board Resolution Mr. Konanur was authorized to
sign in his own capacity to sing only upto 18.11.2014 post which
joint signature was a must, accordingly, the bank has erred by
honoring the said cheque dated 27.04.2015. However, since the
bank has not strictly followed the due diligence norms while
opening the OD Account No.48 and allowing operations in the
account, the bank has been advised to pay you a compensation of
Rs.3000/-. The oral evidence of the complainant is strengthened
by report of the Ombudsman of RBI.
24. Rohit Puri worked as Assistant Manager in the year 2013 to
2015 and Vidyadara Shetty worked as Manager in the year 2017 to
2019 examined as witnesses before the court. Herein this case,
accused No.2 is none other than the then Manager of the Vijaya
Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. That
being the position, evidences of the manager of bank is required to
be scrutinized carefully. The then Assistant Manager of the Vijaya
Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru admits
– 17- – CC-18759/2019
that Account bearing No.126106021000048 opened after obtaining
the relevant records from the customer. The evidence of the then
Assistant Manager of the Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch,
Basavanagudi, Bengaluru run contrary to the evidence of the
complainant and report of the Ombudsman of RBI. Another
manager of the Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch,
Basavanagudi, Bengaluru gone to the extent of deposing he has no
knowledge about the illegality committed by the accused persons.
From the discussion made supra, the evidences of these the then
Manager and Assistant Manager of Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar
Branch, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru is unreliable.
25. Investigating Officer clearly spell out in his evidence that he
had collected cheque bearing No.126139 of Rs.20,00,000/- dated
27.04.2015 drawn on Vijaya Bank, Gandhi Bazaar Branch,
Basavangudi, Bengaluru and bank statement of Vijaya Bank,
Basavangudi related to Bank Account No.126106021000048.
Thereby, Investigating Officer evidence suggests that he had
collected relevant documents with respect to the commission of the
offences by the accused No.1.
– 18- – CC-18759/2019
26. The defenses of the accused No.1 extracted in the evidences
of the prosecution witnesses are that the opening of the OD
account intimated to the complainant through a mail on
27.05.2015. The complainant was very well aware of the OD
account opened by the accused No.1. There were 96 transactions
in the disputed OD account. Report of the Ombudsman of RBI
would show that the complainant selectively disputed a few
transactions in the said account. Investigating Officer has
admitted that a sum of Rs.2,29,606/- on 28.05.2015, Rs.61,808/-
on 01.06.2015, 50,000/- on 08.06.2015, Rs.5,00,000/- on
17.06.2016, Rs.5,00,000/- on 07.04.2015, Rs.4,00,000/- on
08.04.2015, Rs.20,00,000/- on 07.04.2015 and Rs.4,060/- on
30.06.2015 were transferred from the admitted company account
to the disputed OD account.
27. The complainant is questioning the cheque amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- transferred from the company account to the OD
account opened by the accused No.1 and an amount of
Rs.30,00,000/- received from M/s. Sipani Constructions and
Developers transferred to the OD account opened by accused No.1.
Neither the complainant permitted to open the OD account nor the
– 19- – CC-18759/2019
complainant authorized to solely subscribe signature on cheque by
accused No.1 during the relevant period. It is the specific evidence
of the complainant that on questioning how the new account
opened in the name of company funds, no response was received
from the accused No.2. It is not the defense of the accused that he
had taken the prior permission of the complainant to do all these
transactions in the bank. It is the very specific case of the
complainant that the power to subscribe signature came to an end
on 18.11.2014. Such being the case, there is no meaning in
accused No.1 solely opening the OD account and then intimating
the same to the complainant in the year 2015. The accused No.1
committed all these illegalities much prior to the sending intimation
through mail to the complainant. Report of the Ombudsman of
RBI tells that the complainant selectively disputed only a few
transactions in the account, verification of the case requires
consideration of elaborate documentary and oral evidence and
extensive investigation which is beyond the scope of banking
Ombudsman scheme 2006 he has closed the complaint under
clause 13(c) of BOS 2006. Such a findings of the Ombudsman
does not in any way dent the case of the prosecution. Mere fact
that Investigating Officer admitted series of amount transferred
– 20- – CC-18759/2019
from the admitted account of the company to the OD account
complainant cannot be find fault with.
28. The accused No.1 worked as Director of the company. The
complainant had entrusted the work to solely subscribe the
signature on all bank transactions of VCCPL company for a limited
period. The accused No.1 access to the information of the
complainant company bank account not only opened the fake
account but also transferred the amounts of the complainant
company to the fake account. Thereby, the accused No.1 has
committed offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC. Further,
accused No.1 being a Director of the bound to protect the interest
at the time of performing the transactions related to complainant
company but he has misappropriated the funds of the complainant
company. Thereby, the accused No.1 has committed an offence
punishable under Section 418 of IPC. The accused No.1 conspired
with accused No.2 committed the offences. accused No.1 is liable
for the offence of criminal conspiracy punishable under Section
120-B of IPC.
29. The material available on record manifest that accused No.1
was the Director of the VCCPL company. Therefore, it cannot be
– 21- – CC-18759/2019
said that accused No.1 representing himself as Director of VCCPL
company cheated by personation. Thereby, the offence punishable
under Section 419 of IPC would not attract. The complainant had
entrusted the work to solely subscribe signature on all transactions
to the accused No.1 from August-2014 to November-2014. The
accused No.1 committed an offence between the period of
December-2014 to January-2015. When complainant was in USA,
accused No.1 had committed the offence. Thus, it cannot be said
that accused No.1 become Director of the company with an
intention to misappropriate funds of the complainant company.
Therefore, I do not find fraudlent or dishonest intention right from
the beginning of the transactions on the part of the accused No.1.
Thus, the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC would not
attract. Hence, I record findings on Point No.1, 2 and 5 in the
AFFIRMATIVE and Point No.3 and 4 in the NEGATIVE.
30. Point No.6:- For the reasons stated while discussing Point
No.1 to 5 the following Order is passed:
ORDER
In exercise of power conferred under Section
248(2) of Cr. P.C. accused No.1 is convicted for the
– 22- – CC-18759/2019
offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and
120B of IPC.
In exercise of power conferred under Section
248(1) of Cr. P.C. accused No.1 is acquitted of the
offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of
IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond of the accused
No.1 are canceled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on the computer, typed by
him, corrected by me and then pronounced by me in the open Court on
this the 12th day of August 2025)(SOMANATHA)
IV Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru.
ORDERS ON SENTENCE:
Accused No.1 has made submission that he is now aged 53
years, he is working as Contractor, elder daughter is studying Final
year Engineer and younger daughter is studying First year
Engineer. Therefore, he has prayed for impose lessor sentence or
fine only.
Learned Sr.APP has made submission that maximum
sentence may be imposed to the accused No.1.
– 23- – CC-18759/2019
The offences punishable under Sections 406 and 418 of IPC
are punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. The
offence punishable under Section 120B (2) of IPC is punishable
with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or with fine
or with both. Keeping in mind the nature of offences and
punishment prescribed for the said offence this court pass the
following :
:SENTENCE:
The accused No.1 is convicted and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year
and shall also pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code.
In default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall
undergo simple imprisonment of 7 ½ months.
The accused No.1 is convicted and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year
and shall also pay fine of Rs.3,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 418 of Indian Penal Code.
In default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall
undergo simple imprisonment of 7 ½ months.
The accused No.1 is hereby convicted and
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of 5 months and shall also pay fine of
– 24- – CC-18759/2019
Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section
120B of Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of
fine, accused No.1 shall undergo simple
imprisonment of 1 month.
All sentences shall run concurrently.
Office is hereby directed to supply authenticated
copy of this Judgment to the accused No.1
immediately at free of cost.
(SOMANATHA)
IV Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE
List of witnesses examined for Complainant:-
PW.1 Sri. H.S. Vishwanath
PW.2 Sri. Vidyadhara Shetty
PW.3 Sri. Rohith Puri
PW.4 Sri. Rajashekaraiah
PW.5 Sri. B.K.Shekar
List of witnesses examined for Defense:-
– NIL –
List of Documents exhibited for Complainant :-
Ex.P1 : Private Complaint
Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW.1
- 25- - CC-18759/2019
Ex.P2 : Letter to Basavanagudi PS
Ex.P2(a) : Signature of PW.1
Ex.P3 : Consent Letter
Ex.P3(a-b) : Signatures of PW.1
Ex.P4 : Board Resolutions
Ex.P4(a) : Signature of PW.1
Ex.P5 : Current Account Opening Form
Ex.P5(a) : Signature
Ex.P6 : Copy of Cheque
Ex.P6(a) : Signature
Ex.P7-8 : Copy of Letter of Intents
Ex.P9 : Copy of Letter of Lien
Ex.P10 : Vijaya Bank Statement of Account
Ex.P11-12 : Copy of Canceled Letters of Lien
Ex.P13 : Copy of Letter of Lien
Ex.P14 : Vijaya Bank Statement of Account
Ex.P15 : Copy of Notice u/s. 91 of Cr. PC
Ex.P16 : Vijaya Bank Statement of Account
Ex.P17 : Copy of Letter of Lien
Ex.P18 : Vijaya Bank Statement of Account
Ex.P19 : Vijaya Bank Letter
Ex.P20 : Account Opening Form for Individuals
Ex.P21 : Copy of Cheque
Ex.P22 : Copy of Report
Ex.P23 : Copy of Notice u/s. 91 of Cr.P.C
Ex.P24 : Vijaya Bank Letter
Ex.P25 : Copy of Statement
- 26- - CC-18759/2019
Ex.P26 : Copy of Reply Notice u/s. 41(A) of Cr.P.C
Ex.P27 : FIR
Material Objects marked on behalf of the Prosecution:-
– Nil –
List of documents exhibited for Defense:-
Ex.D-1 : Board Resolution
Ex.D-2 : E-Mail Message
Digitally signed
by SOMANATHA
SOMANATHA Date: 2025.08.12
17:23:53 +0530
IV ACJM, Bengaluru.
- 27- - CC-18759/2019
ORDERS ON SENTENCE:
Accused No.1 has made submission that he is now aged 53
years, he is working as Contractor, elder daughter is studying Final
year Engineer and younger daughter is studying First year
Engineer. Therefore, he has prayed for impose lessor sentence or
fine only.
Learned Sr.APP has made submission that maximum
sentence may be imposed to the accused No.1.
The offences punishable under Sections 406 and 418 of IPC
are punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. The
offence punishable under Section 120B (2) of IPC is punishable
with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or with fine
or with both. Keeping in mind the nature of offences and
punishment prescribed for the said offence this court pass the
following :
:SENTENCE:
The accused No.1 is convicted and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year
and shall also pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code.
– 28- – CC-18759/2019
In default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall
undergo simple imprisonment of 7 ½ months.
The accused No.1 is convicted and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year
and shall also pay fine of Rs.3,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 418 of Indian Penal Code.
In default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall
undergo simple imprisonment of 7 ½ months.
The accused No.1 is hereby convicted and
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of 5 months and shall also pay fine of
Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section
120B of Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of
fine, accused No.1 shall undergo simple
imprisonment of 1 month.
All sentences shall run concurrently.
Office is hereby directed to supply authenticated
copy of this Judgment to the accused No.1
immediately at free of cost.
(SOMANATHA)
IV Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru.
- 29- - CC-18759/2019
ORDERS ON SECTION 389(3) OF CR. P.C.
Defense counsel has filed an application under
Section 389(3) of Cr.P.C stating that accused NO.1 is
intending to prefer an appeal, he requires 30 days time to
file an appeal and to obtain an order of suspension from
appellate court, accused No.1 was on bail throughout the
proceedings accused No.1 may be enlarged on bail by
suspending the operation of the order of conviction and
sentence for a period of 30 days. Defense counsel has
filed an application seeking permission to deposit the cash
security.
Heard.
The contents of the application satisfies that
accused No.1 intends to prefer an appeal before the higher
court. Accused No.1 is required time to present the appeal
and obtain the orders of the appellate court. It is
submitted that accused No.1 cannot make fine payment
since he is going to challenge the very conviction and
sentence of imprisonment itself. The accused No.1 is
ready to offer cash security for release him on bail and to
suspend the operation of the sentence of imprisonment
today. Hence, court pass the following.
ORDER
The application filed under Section 389(3) of
Cr.P.C. is allowed.
– 30- – CC-18759/2019
The operation and execution of the sentence of
imprisonment is suspended for a period of 30 days
from the date of this order.
Accused No.1 is released on bail bond for a
period of 30 days from the date of this order on the
following conditions.
1) Accused No.1 shall execute his personal bail
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with a surety for the
likesum.
Accused No.1 is released on bail upon offering cash
security of Rs.10,000/- today. Office is directed to
take cash security today.
Defense counsel prays time for furnishing surety.
For furnishing surety by : 19-08-2025.
IV Addl. CJM, Bangalore.