Mr.J.Muthiah Vs State Rep by Its the Deputy Superintendent of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2025)

Mr.J.Muthiah Vs State Rep by Its the Deputy Superintendent of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both miscellaneous petitions ordered: substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on petitioners/A2 to A5 suspended till disposal of Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025; A2 to A4 enlarged on bail on Rs.10,000/- bonds with two sureties each, subject to periodic reporting conditions (with Section 317 Cr.P.C recourse); fine on A4 and A5 modified to Rs.45,00,000/- payable in stages (Rs.20,00,000/- on executing sureties, balance Rs.25,00,000/- by 13.06.2025), to be placed in an interest-earning fixed deposit; A4 to report weekly at CBI:ACB, Thiruvananthapuram till 13.06.2025 and to surrender her passport, returnable on deposit of the modified fine.

Issue for consideration

Whether the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioners/A2 to A5 following their conviction in C.C.No.4 of 2014 should be suspended and the petitioners enlarged on bail pending disposal of Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court granted suspension of sentence till the disposal of the present criminal appeals, finding that substantial amounts had been withheld and could be secured, that A2 and A3 were facilitators and not beneficiaries, that the petitioners had raised substantial grounds, that the Trial Court judgment requires re-consideration, and that the statutory appeal would take time to reach final hearing.

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that a substantial amount had been withheld and could be secured, and that as regards A2 and A3, they are facilitators and not beneficiaries.

Key takeaways

A2 to A4 were ordered to be enlarged on bail on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.ratio¶117
A2 and A3 shall appear before the Trial Court on the first working day of once in three months at 10.30 a.m. until disposal of the criminal appeal; A4 similarly from July 2025; if unable to appear, they may file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C and appear on another day as directed by the Trial Court.ratio¶118

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.), Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025, order dated 26.03.2025: Under Section 430 BNSS, the Court suspended, till disposal of the appeals, the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on A2-A5, convicted on 26.02.2025 by the XI Additional Special Court (Banking and Financial Institution Cases for CBI), Chennai in C.C.No.4 of 2014 for criminal conspiracy and forgery of four Letters of Credit aggregating about Rs.19.79 crores drawn on Indian Bank, Edaikazhinadu Branch and discounted at SBI, Bombay (offences under Sections 120(b) r/w 420, 467, 468 and 471 r/w 467 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988). Grounds: substantial amounts withheld/secured (outstanding of Rs.8,13,24,326/- per Ex.P126; Rs.7 Crores available in A5's account per Ex.P90; DRT Mumbai order in O.A.No.92 of 2014), A2 and A3 being facilitators and not beneficiaries, substantial grounds raised by the petitioners, and the statutory appeal needing time for final hearing. A2-A4 enlarged on bail on Rs.10,000/- bonds with two sureties each; quarterly reporting before the Trial Court (A4 from July 2025), with liberty to apply under Section 317 Cr.P.C on days of absence. The fine on A4 and A5 (Rs.90,00,000/- aggregate) was modified to 50% - Rs.45,00,000/- payable to the credit of C.C.No.4 of 2014 (Rs.20,00,000/- on executing sureties; Rs.25,00,000/- by 13.06.2025), to be kept in an interest-earning fixed deposit. A4, a lady from Kerala, to appear every Monday at CBI:ACB, Thiruvananthapuram up to 13.06.2025 and to surrender her passport, returnable on deposit of the modified fine. Counsel for A4 had referred to CBI vs. Ashok Sirpal (Crl.A.No.4277 of 2024, dated 24.10.2024) urging that fine-deposit conditions should not defeat the right of appeal.

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

Crl.M.P.No.5449 of 2025

1.J.Muthiah 2.M.N.Muralidhar ... Petitioners

Vs.

The State rep. By its, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, SPE/CBI/ACB, Chennai. ... Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 430 of BNSS, to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioners/appellants in C.C.No.4 of 2014 on the file of the learned XI Additional Special Court Judge (Banking and Financial Institution Cases for CBI), Chennai by its order dated 26.02.2025 and enlarge the petitioners on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal.

Page 1 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

For Petitioners : Mr.B.Bhagawat Krishna For Respondent : Mr.K.Srinivasan Special Public Prosecutor for CBI Cases

Crl.M.P.No.4066 of 2025

1.Priyalakshmi 2.M/s.Unique Step Marine India Pvt. Ltd., rep. By A4-Mrs.Priyalakshmi, R/o.Jayamandiram, Koovoor, Palayamkunnu, P.O., Varakala, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk, State of Kerala, Pin code – 695 146. ... Petitioners Vs.

The State rep. By its, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, SPE/CBI/ACB, Chennai. ... Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 430 of BNSS, to suspend the execution of sentence of imprisonment and fine passed in C.C.No.4 of 2014 against the petitioners/appellants by the learned XI Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases related to Banks and Financial Institution, Chennai by its order dated 26.02.2025 and enlarge the petitioners on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal.

Page 2 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Sivananthan For Respondent : Mr.K.Srinivasan Special Public Prosecutor for CBI Cases

COMMON ORDER

The petitioners/A2 to A5 in C.C.No.4 of 2014 convicted by the Trial

Court by judgment dated 26.02.2025 filed these appeals and suspension of sentence petitions.

2.The conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioners in C.C.No.4

of 2014 is as follows:

A2 is convicted and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Sections 120(b) r/w. 420, 467, 468 and 471 r/w. 467 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment on each count of each Section 420(2 counts), 467 (2 counts) and 471 r/w. 467(2 counts) IPC and to pay

Page 3 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count of each Section, in total Rs.40,000/-, in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment on each count of each section.

A3 is convicted and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Sections 120(b) r/w. 420, 467, 468 and 471 r/w. 467 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment on each count of each Section 420(2 counts), 467 (2 counts) and 471 r/w. 467(2 counts) IPC and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count of each Section, in total Rs.40,000/-, in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment on each count of each section.

A4 is convicted and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,00,000/-, in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Sections 120(b) r/w. 420, 467, 468 and 471 r/w. 467 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment on each count of each Section 420(4 counts), 467 (4 counts), 468 (4 counts) and 471 r/w. 467 (4 counts) IPC and to pay fine of Rs.2,50,000/- on each count of each Section, in total Rs.40,00,000/-, in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment on each count of each section.

A5 Company is convicted for the offence under Section 420(4

Page 4 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

counts), 467 (4 counts), 468 (4 counts) and 471 r/w. 467 (4 counts) IPC and imposed a fine of Rs.2,50,000/- on each count of each Section, in total Rs.40,00,000/-, in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment on each count of each section.

3.The case of the prosecution is that A1, the then Branch Manager of Indian Bank, Edaikazhinadu Branch, Kanchipuram District during the year 2012-2014 issued four Letter of Credits [hereinafter referred to as 'LCs'] by entering into a criminal conspiracy with private individuals, A2 to A4 to cheat the Bank. A2 and A3 were involved in the offences as Applicants/Buyers of Goods to issue the four forged LCs by creating the fictitious firms in papers alone, namely, M/s.Muthu Enterprises, M/s.ITS A Genes Thing and M/s.Geomatric Trading. A4 and A5 Company M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited, Mumbai which also existed only in paper involved in the alleged offence as Beneficiary/Seller of Goods by getting the entire four LCS amount of Rs.19,78,76,840/-. P.W.15/Assistant General Manager of Zonal Office, Kancheepuram on 13.02.2013 lodged a complaint with ACB, Chennai pertaining to the four forged Letters of Credit aggregating to Rs.19.79 Crores. These four LCs were discounted at SBI, Page 5 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

Fort, Bombay which suffered a loss of Rs.20.58 Crores. On an alert issued by SBI, out of the total amount illegally discounted, SBI, Bombay received back part payment of Rs.4.49 Crores from Indian Bank, Neelangarai Branch. As a matter of fact, Edaikazhinadu Branch was not authorized to issue any LC. But A1 forged his own signature and prepared these fake LCs in favour of the beneficiary M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited on the basis of the application given by M/s.Muthu Enterprises, M/s.ITS A Genes Thing and M/s.Geomatric Trading. P.W.15 visited the Branch and an internal investigation undertaken. On verification with the Branch records, it was found that there was no corresponding entries showing issuance of LCs/Ex.P21 to Ex.P24. The signature of M/s.Ignatius Deepam/A1 found therein tallied with A1 with the specimen signature available with Indian Bank. P.W.23, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI:ACB:Chennai took up the investigation, recorded the statements from the witnesses, cited 41 witnesses in the charge sheet and documents 1 to 140 against A1 to A5 for the offence under Sections 120(b) r/w. 420, 467, 468 and 471 r/w. 467 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Page 6 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

4.The first Letter of Credit bearing No.0522ILCIB080038 dated

19.10.2012 signed by A1 as Branch Manager for a sum of Rs.4,98,44,340/-. The applicant of this LC is M/s.Muthu Enterprises, Vadapalani, Chennai and the beneficiary is M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai. The second Letter of Credit bearing No.0542ILICIB010036 dated 10.11.2012 was for a sum of Rs.4,95,00,000/-. The applicant of this LC is M/s.ITS A Genes Thing , Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai and the beneficiary is M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai. The third Letter of Credit bearing No.00312ILICIB090132 dated 20.12.2012 was for a sum of Rs.4,98,00,000/-, the applicant of this LC is M/s.Geomatrix Trading, Teynampet, Chennai and the beneficiary is M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai. The fourth Letter of Credit bearing No.00313ILICIB010133 dated 20.12.2012 was for a sum of Rs.4,87,32,500/-, the applicant of this LC is M/s.Muthu Enterprises and the beneficiary is M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai.

5.P.W.11/Mr.K.S.Sivashanmugam, Senior Manager, Inspection

Page 7 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

Centre, Chennai, Mr.Rajagopal Reddy, Chief Manager and Mr.Alwin David, DGM/Head, Inspection Centre, Chennai conducted investigation at Edaikazhinadu Branch in respect of issuance of LCs and prepared a report/Ex.P81. During inspection, it was found that A2 and A3 have current account in Edaikazhinadu Branch in the name of their firms, M/s.Muthu Enterprises and M/s.ITS A Genes Thing. It was confirmed that the then Branch Manager, A1 issued four fake LCs for Rs.20.58 Crores and they were discounted by SBI at Mumbai through the beneficiary firms, namely, A5 and it is Managing Director/A4. P.W.3/Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Mumbai, LC discounting Bank confirmed that on 03.07.2012 A4 as Director of M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited opened a current account in their Branch and amounts were credited to A5's account by discounting the LCs. The commercial invoice, packing list and transport receipt were submitted. On receipt of these documents, SBI sought an acceptance from Indian Bank, Edaikazhinadu Branch to confirm the genuineness of the LC, who had confirmed the genuineness of the LCs and the LCs were discounted.

Page 8 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

6.As regards A2, P.W.9, P.W.10, P.W.14 and P.W.17 deposed against

him. P.W.9 deposed that he is doing vegetable/fruits business and running a Travels in the name of Shri Kumaran Travels at Vadapalani. He is having overdraft account in Indian Bank, Neelangarai Branch. He knew A2 who was then involved in interior decoration contract and as an introducer, he introduced A2 to open an account for M/s.Muthu Enterprises. P.W.10 was Chief Manager of Indian Bank, Neelangarai Branch, Chennai, during his tenure A2/Proprietor of M/s.Muthu Enterprises had a current account open on 17.04.2012 and he confirms that A2 received Rs.2 Crores i.e, Rs.1,80,00,000/- and Rs.14,00,000/- from Indian Bank, Edaikazhinadu Branch through transfer. P.W.14 is the witness for the house search of M/s.Muthiah's residence from where files, cheques and papers signed by Muthiah were seized. P.W.17/Thirumavalavan, Assistant Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Neelangarai Branch confirmed that current account in the name of M/s.Muthu Enterprises and A2 as its proprietor operated in Neelangarai Branch and the transactions made in that account have been clearly spoken by him.

Page 9 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

7.As regards A3, P.W.4, P.W.5 and P.W.22 deposed against him. P.W.22, Branch Head of ING Vysya Bank, Adyar Branch confirmed that A4 had a Bank account in the name of M/s.Geomatrix Trading and in the name of M/s.ITS A Genes Thing. He confirms that Rs.70 lakhs has been credited by way of RTGS from SBI from the account of A4 and on the same day, the said amount was debited for issuing RTGS tot he account of M/s.Muthu Enterprises. Further, the amount between Rs.105 lakhs was credited on the basis of RTGS from ICIC Bank from the account of M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited and on the same day, a sum of Rs.104 lakhs was debited for issuing RTGS to the account of M/s.Muthu Enterprises. P.W.4 and P.W.5, Postman at Thiruvanmiyur Post Office confirmed the delivery of post tot he resident of Mr.M.N.Muralidhar and M/s.Geomatric Trading. P.W.8/Raviraj, who is running a Construction Company knew A3 who was a tenant in his apartment, using it for residential purpose and paying the monthly rent. Thus, A2 and A3 were the name lendors facilitating A4 and A5 in looting and diverting the amount derived from the forged LCs.

Page 10 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

8.As regards A4, she opened a current account in the name of A5 for discounting the fake LCs, then presented the request letter through P.W.6 along with bill of exchange, tax invoice, packing list, false transport receipt and A4 received intimation from the discounting Bank as evident from Ex.P45, Ex.P52, Ex.P59 and Ex.P66. On receipt of these intimations, A4 received a fake LC proceeds through A5's Company account as evident from Ex.P38. 27 cheques were drawn by A4 on various dates in favour of herself or in favour of various persons and most part of the LC proceeds of RS.19.78 Crores has been withdrawn by using the above cheques apart from various transfers like RTGS and other methods. In this case, A4 had benefited from the fake LC proceeds who was playing a vital role in all accounts. P.W.6/Proprietor of CM Financial Services confirmed that A4 utilized him to present documents to the discounting Bank and later these documents were found to be forged. P.W.6 had no personal knowledge on the contents of the documents. Thus, the petitioners/A2 to A5 in connivance and active role by A1 created four forged LCs, ensured that these LCs are discounted and the amounts have been transferred through

Page 11 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

them and finally majority of the amount had been benefited by A4 using the name of A5.

9.During trial, P.W.1 to P.W.23 examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P157 marked on the side of the prosecution. On the side of the defence, D.W.1, who is the son of A4 examined and Ex.D1 to Ex.D3 marked. On conclusion

of trial, the Trial Court based on the evidence and materials convicted the petitioners as stated above.

10.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 and A3 is that they played accommodation role and they are not the beneficiaries of the entire transaction, for small commission, unknowingly had given their names and now they are caught in the web. He would submit that in this case as regards A2 and A3 only fine amount imposed and not compensation ordered as to the other accused who are the beneficiaries. In this case, the petitioners firms in existence and they had been transacting doing business in their bank accounts. On the request, accommodation was given and nothing more. The Trial Court failed to consider that almost

Page 12 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

substantial amount recovered. In this case, A2 returned a sum of Rs.3.84 Crores which is confirmed by P.W.10. The prosecution had conducted the case in a pick and choose manner. P.W.6 admits that he used four lorry receipt in transacting LCs shown as witness, he is the fulcrum in discounting the LCs and encashing the same.

11.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners/A4 and A5 is that P.W.6, Proprietor of CM Financial Services , Mumbai had an account with State Bank of India, Mumbai, submitted letter of request for discounting LCs filed, namely, Ex.P40, Ex.P47, Ex.P54 and Ex.P61. P.W.3/Assistant General Manager confirmed the same. It is projected that A4 is the Director of A5 Company but there is no materials to confirm that she is the Managing Director of A5 Company. D.W.1 confirms that she was not the Managing Director of A5 Company during the relevant period beteeen November and December 2012 when the four LCs said to have been discounted. On the other hand, he confirms that one Mr.Civin Varghese was the Chairman of A5 Company. Further, a false theory of criminal conspiracy has been projected as though all accused had prior

Page 13 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

meeting of mind and devised a plan in siphoning out LC amount. But there is no evidence either directly or indirectly or to infer that A1 to A4 had any meeting of mind in any place either in Chennai or Mumbai prior to the date of issuance of LC i.e. 19.10.2012. In this case, the Investigating Officer admits that he has not visited Mumbai to investigate the case. The signature of A4 signed as Priya found in documents have not been sent to any Handwriting Expert. He would further submit that D.W.1 clearly deposed that one Meenakshi who was involved in all discounting, when A4 was in abroad. D.W.1 while he was studying L.L.B in Surat, joined A5 Company at Mumbai as legal intern from 19.12.2012 to 16.01.2013 without getting any stipend, at that time, A4 was only the Director and one Mr.Civin Varghese was the Chairman running the business of A5. In fact, A4 was in Dubai from August 2012 to January 2013. At that time, one Meenakshi was the authorised signatory of A5 Company and managed the business. The said Meenakashi, Director of Pro-AM Business Solution at Hyderabad, she was the Additional Director of Tarapur Transformers Limited at Mumbai, well known to the Bank officials, she was doing liasoning work and helped the business organizations in getting credit facilities in Crores. D.W.1 was

Page 14 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

ready to identify the said Meenakshi but the CBI not taken steps to apprehend the said Meenakshi. The internship certificate/Ex.D3 was issued by Meenakshi which bears her signature and A4 had not signed in Ex.P39, Ex.P41, Ex.P42, Ex.P46, Ex.P.48, Ex.P53, Ex.P55, Ex.P60 and Ex.P62. Further, he confirmed that many bank officials used to meet the said Meenakshi and P.W.6 regularly visits Meenakshi. On one such occasion,, Meenakshi handed over some blank lorry receipts and other documents to P.W.6 which he identifies in Ex.P42, Ex.P49 and Ex.P56. In fact, A4 lodged a complaint before Hyderabad Police Station relating to misappropriation and fabrication of documents by Meenakshi in respect of A5 Company. But these facts not been considered by the Trial Court. He further submitted that there is nothing on record to show that A4 is the Managing Director of A5 Cmpany. It was Meenakshi who impersonated A4 and was the force behind the entire transaction. Hence, the petitioner/A4 has been made a scapegoat in this case. He further submitted that the charge itself has been wrongly framed though it has been projected that there has been a loss of Rs.20,57,97,800/-, A5 Company paid these amounts, which is as follows:

Page 15 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

PW-3	Lcs	Credit	Recovered	/PW3 Cross
P-21	29.10.2012	5,18,44,000	5,18,44,000
P-22	22.11.2012	5,14,30,000	5,14,80,000
P-23	14.01.2013	5,17,92,000	2,11,49,474
P-24	14.01.2013	5,06,18,800	--------------
		20,56,84,800	12,44,73,474	8,13,24,326

12.Earlier A4 filed a petition under Section 91 Cr.P.C. in Crl.M.P.No.6851 of 2024 to summon the Statement of Current Account No.32406298168 for the period from 2012 to 2024 and State of LC Discounting Account of M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited for the period from 2012 to 2024 and the same was dismissed. Against which, the petitioner preferred a petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.30345 of 2024 and this Court by order dated 19.02.2025 dismissed the petition. He further submitted that in this case, the outstanding amount as per the SBI letter/Ex.P126 is Rs.8,13,24,326/-. EX.P90/letter from Indian Bank to SBI confirms that Rs.7 Crores which is available in the account of M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited has been freezed. The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai passed an order in O.A.No.92 of 2014 directing the petitioners and others to pay a sum of Rs.9,31,85,242.28 and hence, a

Page 16 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

substantial amount already secured and the loss is not as huge as projected. He would submit that A4 would take all steps to recoup the loss sustained by the Bank. He further submitted that A4 is a lady aged about 54 years with health ailments, she was out of India during the relevant period and now she is confined in Prison.

13.The learned counsel for A4 relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Ashok Sirpal [Crl.A.No.4277 of 2024 dated 24.10.2024] , wherein the Apex Court finding that the substantial amount has been paid in lieu of the fine sentence imposed, upheld the suspension of sentence order passed by the High Court. Further it is also observed that the Courts to keep in mind that if a condition of deposit of amount is imposed while suspending the sentence of fine, the same should not be such that it is impossible for the appellant to comply with it, such a condition may amount to defeating his right of appeal against the order of conviction which may also violate his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, prayed for modification in the payment of fine amount till the main appeal is decided.

Page 17 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

14.The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing the respondent filed a counter stating that a case in RC 07(A)/2013 was registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Branch, Chennai on 13.02.2013 on the basis of complaint lodged by one R.Durairaj, Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Indian Bank, Kancheepuram against M.Ignatius Dheepam (A1), the then Manager, Indian Bank, Edaikazhinadu Branch, Vettuvankeni, Chennai-600115, J.Muthiah (A2 ), S/o. John Nallamuthu, M/s.Muthu Enterprises, Office-cum-Residence at No.29/2, Link Main Road/2nd Main Road, Venkeeswari Nagar, Vadapalani, Chennai, M.N.Muralidhar (A3), S/o. M.B.Nagaraj, M/s. Its a Genes Thing, Officecum-Residence at No.2A, Aishwarya Apartments, No.36, 4th Sea Ward Road, Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvanmivur, Chennai, M/s.Geomatrix Trading (A4), No.3, Cenotaph 2nd Line Astalakshmi Apartment, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018, M/s.Unique Step Marine India Pvt Ltd., (A-5), No.lll & 112, Royal Palace Building, Opp. Glomax Mall, Sector-2, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai-410210 and unknown public servants and others. It is alleged in the complaint that A1 while working as Manager, Indian Bank,

Page 18 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

Edaikazhinadu Branch, Vettuvankeni, Chennai entered into criminal conspiracy with other accused persons with an intention to cheat Indian Bank and State Bank of India issued four Letter of Credits totaling Rs.20.58 Crores with M/s.Unique Step Marine India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai as beneficiary. It is further alleged in the said complaint that four Letter of Credits were under the signatures of A1 and 2 out of 4 LCs were with the forged signature of Mr.T.Shanmuganathan, Deputy Manager. The complaint further mentioned that there is no post as Deputy Manager in the Indian Bank. Further, the seal affixed in the Letter of Credits also did not match with the seal used by the Branch. It is further alleged that A1 received an amount of Rs.19 lakhs from Mr.Muthiah of M/s.Muthu Enterprises with whom A1 had long standing association played pivotal role in the crime. It is further alleged in the complaint that A1 by doing the aforesaid acts and by abusing his official position as public servant cheated Indian Bank and SBI to the tune of Rs.20.58 crores. After investigation, a Final Report was submitted before the XI Additional Special Court for CBI cases, Chennai against A1 to A5 under Sections 120-B IPC r/w 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and u/Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and

Page 19 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

substantive offences thereof. The Trial Court framed charges under relevant sections and after trial, the Trial Court by order dated 26.02.2025 rightly convicted all the accused for the offences committed by them. Hence, prayed for dismissal.

15.Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that as per Ex.P126, the outstanding amount as on November 2013 in Rs.8,13,24,326/- with State Bank of India, Mumbai and as per Ex.P90, the Indian Bank, Zonal Office, Kancheepuram confirmed that a sum of Rs.7 Crores in available in the account of A5/M/s.Unique Step Marine India Private Limited and further requested SBI to exercise further caution for recovery of bills discounted under the LCs. Thus, it is seen that substantial amount has been withheld could be secured. As regards A2 and A3 are concerned, they are facilitators and not beneficiaries. A4 and A5 are concerned, who are the beneficiaries, substantial amount has been safeguarded and secured. The DRT, Mumbai had already passed an order in O.A.No.92 of 2014. Further, it is seen that the petitioner/A4, who is a lady, is ready for settlement if the Bank agrees and would take earnest steps to

Page 20 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

resolve the issue. There is no serious investigation done with SBI, Mumbai and to the attendant circumstances that happened in Mumbai. The petitioner raised substantial grounds. The Trial Court judgment requires re-consideration. The appeal is a statutory one. It is seen that it would take some time for the appeal to be taken up for final hearing. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to grant suspension of sentence till the disposal of the present criminal appeals.

16.Accordingly, t he Substantive Sentence of Imprisonment imposed

on the petitioners/A2 to A5 is suspended till the disposal of the appeals with the following conditions:

1. A2 to A4 are ordered to be enlarged on bail, on condition that they shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

1. A2 and A3 shall appear before the Trial Court on the first working day of once in three months at 10.30 a.m. until the disposal of the criminal appeal. A4 shall appear before the Trial Court on the first working day of once in three months at 10.30 a.m. commencing from the month of July 2025 until

Page 21 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

the disposal of the criminal appeal. If A2 to A4 are not able to appear before the Trial Court on that day, they shall make arrangements to file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C and shall appear before the Trial Court on any other day in lieu of the date of their absence as directed by the Trial Court.

1. The fine amount imposed on A4 and A5 is modified. As per the order of the Trial Court, A4 and A5 were directed to pay Rs.50,00,000/- and Rs.40,00,000/- respectively, in total Rs.90,00,000/- as fine, which is modified to the effect that A4 and A5 shall pay 50% of the fine amount, i.e., Rs.45,00,000/- to the credit of C.C.No.4 of 2014 before the Trial Court, of which, Rs.20,00,000/- to be deposited to the credit of C.C.No.4 of 2014 while executing the sureties and the balance amount of Rs.25,00,000/- to be paid on or before 13.06.2025.

1. The Trial Court on receipt of the aforesaid fine amount shall deposit the same in an interest earning Fixed Deposit;

1. Since A4 being a lady hailing from the State of Kerala and she needs to be present in Kerala to liquidate her assets to arrange funds and for negotiating with the Bank, she is directed to appear before CBI:ACB, Thiruvananthapuram every Monday at 10.30 a.m. Upto 13.06.2025.

Page 22 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

1. Further, A4 is directed to surrender her Passport to the CBI:ACB, Thiruvananthapuram who shall receive the same with acknowledgement. On deposit of the modified fine amount of Rs.45,00,000/-, the passport to be handed back to Mrs.Priyalakshmi/A4. Thereafter, A4 is directed to appear before the Trial Court as directed above.

17.Accordingly, this Miscellaneous Petitions are ordered.

26.03.2025

cse

Note: Issue order copy on 01.04.2025

To

1.The XI Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases related to Banks and Financial Institution,

Chennai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, SPE/CBI/ACB, Chennai.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI:ACB, Thiruvananthapuram.

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison for Women, Puzhal.

Page 23 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

cse

5.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal.

6.The Special Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Crl.M.P.Nos.5449 & 4066 of 2025 in Crl.A.Nos.289 & 248 of 2025

26.03.2025

Page 24 of 24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis