She allegedly misappropriated a sum of Rs.
In the trial, 12 witnesses were examined.
The Bail bond of the accused is cancelled A second chargesheet was filed after years on 18.8.1995 on the ground that as the Respondent has been dismissed from the service, numbersanction was required for her prosecution.
While the criminal proceedings were pending, she was dismissed from service by an order dated 1.6.1985.
137 of 2003 The Respondent herein was working as a Manager in State Bank of Mysore, 4th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore.
137 OF 2003 State of Karnataka through CBI Appellant Versus K. Vijayalakshmi Respondent B. SINHA, J Interpretation of Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for short the Code is in question in these appeals which arise out of judgments and orders dated 9.1.2002 and 10.4.2002 in Criminal Petition Nos.
By a judgment and order dated 14.11.1991, the learned XXI Addl.
City Civil and Sessions and Special Judge, Bangalore, companytending that only the Board of Directors was the companypetent authority therefor.
Criminal Appeal No.
The sanctioning authority was number companypetent to issue the said sanction order.
She was examined under Section 313 of the Code and also laid defence evidence.
City Civil and Sessions and Special Judge while accepting the said plea directed The sanction order Ex.
1279 of 2002 The Respondent herein was working as a Junior Telecom Officer in Shankarapuram Telecom Exchange.
R.C. 34A/1994 was registered.
P28 is invalid.
She faced a full fledged trial.
Further proceedings of the case is stopped and the accused is released.
She had dominion and companytrol over the management of the accounts of the Bank.
The question as regard sanction accorded by the Managing Director of the Bank was raised by the Respondent herein before the learned XXI Addl.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
One R. Veera Prathap made a companyplaint that he had demanded an illegal gratification for showing official favour whereupon a case in Crime No.
40,000/ wherefor a chargesheet was filed on 27.12.1984.
Criminal Appeal No.
Cognizance was taken by an order dated 31.8.2001.
A fresh charge sheet was filed after obtaining an order of sanction which came to be challenged before the High Court by the Respondent in an application filed under Section 482 of the Code.
330 of 2000 and 4007 of 2001 respectively passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore.
A charge sheet was filed therein and the Special Judge for CBI cases, Bangalore by an order dated 16.7.1999 took companynizance of an offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for short the Act .
