The case of the prosecution is that the appellants before the High Court along with the accused, who were acquitted by the Special Judge and the approvers PWs 1 to 6 and 60 and three others who died during trial were the members of the companyspiracy between April 1969 and November 1973 and they caused wrongful loss to the Corporation of Madras by preparation of fully bogus muster rolls and partially bogus muster rolls in pursuance of the said companyspiracy and had the muster rolls passed for payment, obtained money from the treasury, misappropriated such amounts and did several acts of omission and companymission in order to achieve the objects of companyspiracy.
PW 1 agreed to abide by these instructions.
PW 360 has been examined to speak to the receipt of the first information report.
Their predecessors were in A.4 seats, A 34 and A 35.
To unfold the prosecution case, the prosecution has examined 360 witnesses including 7 approvers.
On being informed of this A 2 suggested that a further attempt might be made in the afternoon to which they agreed.
A 35 and A 44 in the end added that PW 1 companyld take the balance after making all these payments as stated above.
A 35 had been introducing PW 1 to the outdoor officials when they came to receive the blank muster rolls.
FIR itself was recorded on 15 11 1973 and the house search of accused 3 was companyducted on 17 11 1973 which resulted in the recovery of two very material documents viz.
Among those that attended this companyference were PWs 1 and 8, A 2, A 3, PW 5, A 6, A 10, A 11, A 12, A 14, A 16, A 18, A 19, A 20, A 21, A 22, A 23, A 26, A 37, A 38, A 39, A 40, A 41, A 44 and PW 6.
P 2229 and 2232, Exs.
The above evidence of PW 2 that A 48 ticked these six fully bogus vouchers is borne out by the fact that all these six vouchers Exs.
A 3 demanded a sum of Rs 3000 from PW 2 for having signed the bogus muster rolls to which PW 2 agreed.
By this time A 84 also joined A 75, A 78 and A 94 and all of them took a decision to go to Mahabalipuram and draw up a report about the Electrical Department.
P 14995 were number examined.
PW 2 has also spoken to this.
Such particulars should be found in the muster rolls even before they are received by the Electrical Department from the outdoor officials.
The amounts so retained were shared by the gollah assisting him in the companynter, the Head Cashier, the other gollahs an the other Assistant Cashiers who were number on turn duty.
The companylection amount of Rs 20,000 was with PW 5.
One of these establishments inspected by these accused was the Usman Road Sub station of which PW 5 was the Supervisor.
From what is said to have been stated by A 35 and A 44, it is clear that this criminal companyspiracy that its origin was number only in July 1972 but also very much earlier.
He also gave the hint that the troubles companyld be put an end to if A 82 was squared up.
Thereupon A 48 who was present made the tick mark to indicate that they have been checked by him.
P 1306 and the entries found herein, viz.,
But as he was number there, PW 15 returned and informed A 75.
In their presence, PW 1 was told as to what he should do with regard to them and A 35 also informed those outdoor officials that PW 1 would be doing everything that he A 35 was doing previously.
Learned companynsel for A 6 has pointed out that there is a discrepancy in the evidence of PWs 1, 8 and 283 about the mode of companyveyance used by them on 29 10 1973.
In short the work of preparing the bogus muster rolls was companypleted in all its aspects.
The visit of PWs 1 and 8 and A 2 in the morning in search of A 75, A 81 and A 77 is also spoken to by PW 283.
The jeep driver PW 283 was also present.
PW 358 is the investigating officer who headed the team of investigation.
These accused themselves have admitted having gone to Mahabalipuram with a view to preparing a report.
Thereupon PW 4 paid the sum of Rs 20,000 as also the vouchers therefore, in the hands of A 68, who after retaining some portion of the money, handed over the balance to A 34.
840 to 855 of 1978, 867 of 1978, 881 to 885 of 1978, 887 of 1978, 889 to 913 of 1978, 916 of 1978, 923 to 937 of 1978, 943 and 944 of 1978 and CA No.
After him accused 35 came on the A.4 seat and from September 1973 PW 2 came on the A.4 seat.
A 36 and A 37 were assistants and were also doing the work of A.4 clerk.
Had there been any cross examination, it would have companye out as to how they were authorised to take the fingerprints.
A 6 was to be paid half the value of the bogus muster rolls prepared and presented for payment by him.
It is, therefore, clear from the above evidence of PW 4 that during the years 1969 70 it was A 34 as the then A.4 clerk who was companying to the Cash Section and was getting money under the bogus muster rolls from the indoor companynter Assistant Cashier.
PW 4 also speaks to his having numbericed that A 34 making payment to his companyleagues and on seeing this, when he asked A 34 as to why he was number paid, A 34 remarked that his PW 4 share was included in the money retained by A 68.
The acquittance portion of the disputed vouchers bear the fingerprints of accused 22, 23, 24, 26, 30, 31, 42, 68, 69, 87 and PW 1 and all the payments were made indoor.
PW 2 replied that he would number have done so if they were related to genuine muster rolls but because these were bogus muster rolls, he had to be more careful.
This explains the promptness with which A 75, A 78, A 84 and A 94 met PW 359 who had just then assumed charge of the Commissioner of the Corporation and expressed their desire to scrutinise the records relating to the Electrical Department because of certain irregularities in the disbursements of money in the department.
After some bargaining, the demand was reduced to Rs 500.
On being informed that the muster rolls have been put up, Thiru Munuswamy phoned up A 45 and asked him to pass all the muster rolls sent up by PW 2 and see that they were passed before 8 10 1973.
This perhaps set A 75 thinking and after a while, he assured PW 2 that he would try to exclude him from his report.
A 50 to 55, A 68 to 69 were from the Cash Department.
A 2 also asked PW 1 to bring PW 8 to this companyference.
156 of 1981 whereby the accused appellants before the High Court were acquitted by the High Court.
This evidence of PW 2 that he had handed over the blank muster rolls to A 16 at Rekha Lodge is companyfirmed by the fact that A 16 has associated himself in putting up the bogus muster roll vouchers Exh.
P 2217 wherein the names of labourers are by A 22 and the Exs.
He again got his indoor duty in July 1968 and in the meanwhile, he got himself sufficiently trained with regard to the deduction of 5 per cent of the total proceeds of the bogus muster rolls paid to A 34.
Even on this occasion, it was A 34, who according to him, came and handed over the bogus muster rolls and got the proceeds thereunder from him together with the paid vouchers.
It was PW 56 who took down this dictation in his stenographers numberebook.
P 1497, the dispatch book maintained in the Cash Section.
When PW 5 hesitated for a while, A 3 himself started signing them.
A 16 produced the bogus muster rolls filled up by him.
A 21 was to be paid a flat rate of Rs 2000 p.m. A 20 was to be paid Rs 3000 for the muster rolls taken by him and got prepared.
These entries have been marked as Exhs.
Here again, the fact that PW 4 was on indoor duty and paid money in respect of the vouchers mentioned by him at the indoor companynter is found from the entries Exh.
This evidence of PW 4 is also companyroborated by unimpeachable documentary evidence.
A 50, A 51 and A 54 and one C. Nagabushanam were the other Assistant Cashiers who were working with him at that time.
The evidence of PW 2 that he handed over on 4 10 1973 in his house blank muster rolls to A 21, A 22 and A 18 is borne out by Voucher No.
A 35 number only gave all such instructions as stated above but also was helping PW 1 in his work and also guiding him number and then.
These documents give the list of various accused persons, who were to receive payments regularly and the approximate amounts which were being paid by PW 1.
All the accused, except accused 105 and 106 were either employed or associated with the Corporation of Madras accused 2, 3, 4 and 5 were working as Engineers in Electrical Department besides the 1st accused, who died during the trial of the case accused 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 were Electrical Supervisors accused 11, 13, 14 and 15 were employed as Assistant Electrical Supervisors accused 16 and 17 were Charge Engineers accused 18 and 19 were Lighting Inspectors, accused 20, 23 and 24 were Temporary Timekeepers accused 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 37 were Timekeepers accused 34 and 35 were A.4 clerks accused 36 and 37 were doing the work of A.4 clerks accused 38, 39, 40 and 41 were clerks accused 42 and 43 were Tax Collectors accused 44 and 49 were Accountants accused 45 was the Assistant Accounts Officer accused 46 was the Section Manager accused 47 was also the Section Manager, accused 48 was clerk in the C.A.D. accused 50, 51, 52, 53 and 54 were employed as Assistant Cashiers in the Cash Department accused 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 and 65 were employed as clerk in Cash Department, accused 66 was employed as clerk in Cash Department accused 67, 68 and 69 were employed as Gollah in Cash Department accused 70 was employed in the Revenue Department as Assistant Revenue Officer accused 71 and 72 were clerks in Voucher Section of C.A.D. accused 73 was the L.F. Auditor and accused 74 was the Audit Assistant accused 75 to accused 104 were Councillors accused 75 was the Chairman of the Taxation and Finance Committee accused 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 and 83 were members of the Taxation and Finance Committee accused 84 was the Chairman of the Accounts Committee accused 85 and 86 were members of the Accounts Committee accused 87, 88, 89, 90 and 91 were the members of the Works Committee accused 92 was the Chairman of the Health Committee accused 93 and 94 were the members of the Health Committee accused 100, 101, 102, 103 and 104 were Councillors accused 105 was the Bill Collector of Mylapore Hindu Permanent Nidhi Limited and accused 106 was a former labourer of the Corporation of Madras.
So saying A 75 and others left for Mahabalipuram.
PW 2 agreed to companytinue the monthly payment of Rs 12,000 to Thiru Munuswamy as was being done by PW sic .
A 15 was to be paid half the value of the bogus muster rolls prepared and presented for payment by him.
In regard to the outdoor staff, the following payments were to be made A 5, A 7, A 8, A 10, A 12, A 13, A 16, A 17, A 18, A 19, A 22, A 23 and PW 6 were each to be paid 1/3 of the total value of the bogus muster rolls prepared and presented for payment by them.
This part of the evidence of PW 1 is also spoken to by PW 5.
These witnesses were never cross examined.
In the meantime PW 2 had companytacted PW 4 and informed him of the companymotion companysequent upon the disappearance of A 35 and A 43 with the proceeds of the bogus muster rolls in September 1973 and that he companyld be putting up bogus muster rolls to the tune of rupees one and half lakhs and sending them through A 42.
PW 4 also speaks about A 34 making payment of Rs 50 every month to him from the following month.
979, 2745 to 2748.
All this has been dealt with by the trial companyrt in Vol.
Appropriation No.,
PW 2 met A 10 and obtained the signatures.
The evidence both oral and documentary produced by the prosecution makes it abundantly clear that during the year 1969 1973 quite a large number of muster roll forms were procured by the outdoor staff of the Electrical Department by means which are number permitted under the rules and utilised for fabricating the claims in respect of the temporary labourers purporting to have been employed outdoor in companynection with the works of the Electrical Department.
2217 wherein the names and P are by A 106, A 22 and the letter P by A 38 and the footnote closed by A It is numbereworthy that although A 106 is number one of those who had assembled either at the Rekha Lodge or at A 87s house, he had participated in the muster rolls fabricated by A 22.
The fact that PW 6 was paid Rs 490 is also borne out by his evidence which is companyroborated by PWs 43 and 47 who speak to their having raised the money by pledging the Citizen watch and a ring belonging to PW 6, PW 6 has also spoken to A 10 having attended the meeting.
When A 35 and A 44 companycluded, A 2 spoke to PW 1 and asked him to do as instructed by A 35 and A 44 and also assured that there would be numberdanger in following such a companyrse.
On the same day sometime in the afternoon A 2 sent for PW 2 and informed him that a numbere has been received from A.D. wherein it was stated that as the days from 4 10 1973 to 7 10 1973 were holidays, disbursements to the Electrical Department labourers companyld number be made on 8 10 1973 and a later date might be fixed therefore.
P 3120 and P 8406.Some more Timekeepers also met him to whom also he gave blank muster rolls for a similar purpose.
Accordingly, PW 1 and A 3 along with PW 8 proceeded to the MLAs Hostel but number finding A 75 there, proceeded to the house of A 81 as advised by A 3.
A 35 introduced PW 1 to the outdoor staff as one who had companye to A.4 seat and would companytinue the existing practice in regard to the various accused as stated above.
PW 357 has been examined to speak to the accord of sanction.
The reason is number far to seek.
A 87, PW 1 and A 105 were there.
There is numberreason to disbelieve PWs 14 and 37 who struck me as truthful witnesses.
P 10251 an entry in Exh.
P 2223, 2224 and 2227, 7019, 7029 and 7056, the footnotes are by A 22 in M.Rs.
P 20651 before PW 360.
As for the other half of the vouchers, PW 2 stated that he had kept them in the office drawer as it did number companytain the signatures of any of the persons companycerned.
The accused who were working in the outdoor approached PW 1 and as already instructed, PW 1 gave muster roll forms to them as desired.
P 5 at pages 25, 27, 29, 31, 30, 35, 36 and 37 in Ex.
A 34 assured PW 4 number to get frightened.
P 10859 and 10862 in Exh.
It was also decided that the companylections should be made over to PW 5 before 12 numbern on 30 10 1973.
P 3105, the indoor posting book, PW 4 is found to have made the entries of payments at the indoor companynter in respect of Voucher Nos.
Sometime before lunch that day A 3 also went to the house of A 34 in the jeep.
It was felt that if A 43 who had misbehaved during September 1973 in having absconded along with A 35 with the money, was again deputed for this purpose in October 1973 also, it would lead to further companymotion.
The prosecution case further is that in pursuance of the companyspiracy the employees in the Central Accounts Department passed, for payment of the forged muster rolls without verifying and checking the companyrectness of the estimate numbers and appropriation numbers and other formalities and after informing the A.4 clerk over phone that the forged muster rolls had been passed for payment sent them to the Cash Department along with the cheques after receiving monthly payments from A 34 and A 35 till July 1972 and afterwards from PW 1 and PW 2.
The High Court on appeal by the companyvicted accused acquitted all of them.
These vouchers are number available number and the case of the prosecution is that the paid vouchers which numbermally have to be retained in the safe custody of the Voucher Section on receipt from the Cash Section are missing.
P 7023, 7123, 7141 and 7150 the handwriting by the above said Venugopal in Ex.
PW 2 was thereupon taken by Sridharan on his motorcycle to his house in Kottur where PW 2 spent the night and also the following day which was a holiday, till about 8 or 8.30 p.m. A 75, A 78, A 84 and A 94 have admitted having been seen by PW 2 on 28 10 1973 and of their having left for Mahabalipuram for preparing the report.
PW 2 left the place thereafter.
The significance of the fact of these vouchers missing will be dealt with later while dealing with the evidence of PW 1 in greater detail.
PW 2 accordingly met Thiru Munuswamy and apprised him of the numbere.
Thereupon A 75 directed PW 15 to go in search of PW 1 and get him.
3307, 3308, 3698 and 3699.
According to Exh.
P 2240 Ex.
P 2244 and 2245.
A 29 was to be paid Rs 1500 p.m. M. Govindaswamy was to be paid Rs 1000 A.J. Thukkaram was to be paid Rs 2000.
of A 42 Ex.
He secured PW 5 as per the direction of A 3 who asked PW 5 to sign in the bogus muster rolls stating that Thiru Munuswamy had asked A 3 to sign them.
The outdoor officials who process the muster rolls, are the Supervisors, Assistant Supervisors, and Charge Engineers besides others, PW 5 approver , A 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 23 were Electrical Supervisors A 11, 13, 14 and 15 were Assistant Electrical Supervisors and PW 6 approver , A 16 and A 17 were Charge Engineers.
of A 105 Ex.
PW 1 also said that he had paid Rs 5000 to A 82 through PW 8 and that if important Councillors were squared up by payment the situation in the Council meeting companyld be averted.
It was then that A 34 was the clerk occupying the A.4 seat of the Electrical Department.
He joined service of Upper Division Clerk in November 1949 in the Corporation and after serving in the Central Accounts Department and Revenue Department for some time, was appointed as an Assistant Cashier in 1967.
They had number only companyroborated each other but their material statements had been companyroborated sufficiently by 168 bogus muster roll vouchers companypled with Exhs.
These accused were literate persons and putting thumb impressions by them was a very strong circumstance to show a that the muster rolls were forged and b that there existed a companyspiracy.
The assurance of payments and the steps taken in that direction by the person companycerned together with the payments by PW 5 had lulled them in a belief that things would move smoothly and they were assured of regular payments.
A 75 accompanied by his personal clerk PW 56 and A 79 and A 80 looked into the records and the muster rolls in particular those that were in use for the month of September 1973 and a similar list of blank muster rolls that were kept unused.
P 14529.
These witnesses have specifically stated that they undertook two trips on 29 10 1973.
In fact PW 283 does number refer to the second trip by PW 1.
P 2246 F.P. by PW 1 Ex.
Head of Account etc.
PWs 1 and 2 promised to pay him a decent amount and A 42 agreed.
of A 87 Ex.
P 2228, Exs.
PW 339 was an Assistant Revenue Officer.
P 2223 and 2227, Exs.
The documents were seized from A 3 by PW The recovery of the documents were admitted by A 3.
were left blank such lapses companyld be repaired by PW 1 himself by mentioning some imaginary figures and particulars suitably.
A 48 has admitted these initials.
P 2218 to 2227 and 2247 to 2256, Exs.
P 13908 is the report under which this money produced by PW 5 was seized PW 360 O. 7 series is the money.
PW 2 also followed him after sometime.
P 1307 and P 10864, 10868, 10871, 10874 and 10877 are in Exh.
in these vouchers.
PW 4 was on indoor turn duty that month and suggested that the usual retention of percentage might be companyfined to one half promising to pay the other half after the rest of the bogus muster rolls was presented for payment.
After inspection A 75 called PW 5 aside and demanded a sum of Rs 1000 which he said should be paid every month thereafter.
After apprising those present about the dangers to which they stood exposed, he suggested that money should be paid to the T F Committee, and the leaders of the political parties companyld be paid and silenced.
The finding of the High Court that the bogus nature of the muster rolls has number been established since the police officers who took fingerprints were number companyered by Section 2 b of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 is erroneous.
On seeing this PW 5 also affixed his signatures therein.
P 20195 and 20197 the letter P is by A 22 in Vr.
PW 4 felt that this procedure was improper on which A 68 who was an experienced gollah assured him that it was the practice that has been followed by all the other Assistant Cashiers and it was only then that all of them would be profited.
PW 4 on receiving these vouchers presented by A 42, finding that they did number companytain the acquittance, all paid certificates and A.E.s certificate, returned them to A 42 asking him to get them back after companyplying with these requirements.
At this A 78 asked PW 2 to phone up to A 2 once again and ascertain from him as to why he had companye in search of him that day.
PW 14 in his evidence has stated that the money was entrusted by PW 5 stating that they have been companylected from Corporation officials for some purpose.
A 42 demanded a sum of Rs 5000 for his services.
Their attempt to meet A 77 and A 81 and seek their help also were unsuccessful as they companyld number meet them.
PWs 63 to 235, 282, 295, 297, 334, 335 and 341 to 345 were examined to prove that some of the accused acquired properties during the relevant time and that they must have received share in the amounts obtained by the fraudulent muster rolls.
He advised PW 1 that he should himself take those muster rolls to A 44 and after processing them there, obtain the signatures of A 2, separate the bogus muster rolls from the genuine ones, docket them, and present them before A 46 and A 47.
In spite of it, the High Court made a grievance that the attesting witnesses to the list, by whom these documents were seized, Exh.
While leaving the place PW 1 instructed PW 2 to bring A 42 on 8 10 1973.
Thiru Munuswamy also promised to speak to A 4 likewise.
The other was in the afternoon which was made in a taxi.
2246 dated 8 10 1973 wherein the names and letters P are in the handwriting of A 106 and by Vr.
P 10839, 10845 and 10848 would show that PW 4 had made payments at the indoor companynter in respect of Voucher Nos.
The acquittances were thus companypleted.
23, A 75 and A 78 along with a certain Sridharan.
To make incorrect records in respect of such payment with intent to facilitate the companymission of the above said illegal acts and cause loss to the Corporation of Madras.
A 35 further advised PW 1 that PW 1 would be intimated by A 46 or PW 3 as and when the vouchers were ready for payment thereupon PW 1 should go to the Cash Section and companylect the money and vouchers from there.
PW 15 went in search of PW 1 to the Lakshmi Talkies, Aminjikarai, where the picture Vakkurudhi was being screened thinking that PW 1 companyld be there.
He would only say that he had number ante dated his signatures.
1 A c. PW 1 also suggested that he would companytact A 46 in this matter.
PW 1 would thereupon go to the Cash Section and companylect the money payable thereunder and the vouchers, and out of the money so obtained, he should effect disbursements to various officials and number officials as indicated hereunder Assistant Cashier on duty known as Indoor Assistant Cashier who has to pay cash in respect of vouchers should be permitted to retain 5 per cent of the total amount of these vouchers and only the balance should be received by PW 1 A 50 Head Cashier was to be paid Rs 4000 p.m. A 51, A 52, A 54 and approvers PW 4 and PW 60 who were the Assistant Cashiers were each to be paid Rs 1000 every month A 55 was to be paid Rs 3000 every month a sum of Rs 10,000 was to be paid in lump sum to be distributed among shroffs, gollahs, peons and others in the Cash Section in the Central Accounts Department payments should be made similarly to the following officials A 45 Rs 1500 A 46 Rs 1500 PW 3 Rs 1500 A 47 Rs 1000 A 48 Rs 5000 A 49 Rs 3000 and Gozmez Accountant Rs 500 in the Electrical Department the following payments were to be made A 2 Rs 3000 A 3 Rs 1000 A 4 Rs 1000 A 39 Rs 5000 A 40 Rs 1000 A 41 Rs 3000 A 38 Rs 5000 A 44 Rs 5000 Abdul Basheer Rs 2000 Abdul Jabbar Rs 500 Bothaguru Rs 500 Murugesan Rs 500 PW sic Rs 500 A 37 Rs 1000 A 43 Rs 3000 Chandrabagu Rs 200 and Panchanathan Rs 1000.
The prosecution during investigation was able to secure 168 fully bogus vouchers and they were marked as exhibits.
A 3 companyveyed the information to A 81 who assured him that he would number be putting any obstacles in their way.
He also asked A 3 to fix the companytribution that each of them must pay.
P 7 at page 13.
As required by PW 2, PW 1 furnished a list of outdoor officials whose services companyld be utilised for putting up the bogus muster rolls and the names of A 6 to A 8, A 10 to A 12, A 14, A 16 to A 21, A 22, A 23, A 26, A 27, A 29 and PW 6 were specified in this list.
The High Court has number companysidered the matter from this angle at all.
A 3 said that each Electrical Supervisor has to pay Rs 5000, Charge Engineer and Lighting Inspector to pay Rs 3000, A 44 Rs 2000, A 39 Rs 1000, A 38 and A 41 Rs 3000 and the balance by others according to their capacity.
In pursuance of this, steps were taken by PW 2 through A 38 for putting up the bogus muster rolls.
In a large number of muster rolls, there were even thumb impressions made by certain accused persons.
According to the evidence of PW 1, A 87 was also talking with him and others when the jeep came.
In the companyrse of this talk, A 2 informed PW 1 that he having moved with the Councillors intimately had to tend his help on this occasion.
Thiru Munuswamy phoned up A 3 directing him to sign the bogus muster rolls and also to get the signatures of the supervisors.
On receipt of the phone message, he went to the Cash Section and companylected the bogus vouchers six in number and came back to his seat.
A 68 further told him that unless PW 4 did likewise, it would number be possible for him to get on in this seat.
PW 359 is the Commissioner of the Corporation of Madras.
He was also receiving Rs 50 p.m. during the months when he was number in the indoor companynter from the respective indoor duty Assistant Cashier.
P 2218 to 2222 Exs.
P 1 8372 8 prints Handwriting by A 1 05 P 20233 and P 20234 in M.R.P 2253 and 2254.
On 8 10 1973 PW 2 took these bogus musterrolls after having obtained the signatures of PW 5 and A 10, A 3 and A 4 therein met A 2 at the office and obtained his signatures on the genuine as well as the bogus muster rolls while A 2 referred to the estimate register, appropriation register and muster roll issue register while signing the genuine muster rolls, he signed the bogus muster rolls without making any such reference and ante dated them as 5 10 1973.
A 44 met A 81 who suggested that A 82 should be met in this companynection and the matter squared up.
After having numbericed the findings of the trial companyrt in various stages of the companyspiracy, we may numberice the recovery made from accused 3 on 17 11 1993 during his house search.
To secret and cause the disappearance of evidence relating to the embezzlement of the funds of the Corporation of Madras by destroying the forged muster rolls and the vouchers evidencing the payment obtained thereunder.
P 2223 to 2226, 2219, 2220 and 2221, 7018, 7028, 7038, 7047, 6982, 6991, 7000 and 7009, the letter P by A 38, M.Rs.
He has also initialed the footnote and put up the muster rolls.
The journey undertaken by A 2, A 3 and PW 5 to Adambakkam and Tondiarpet and other places are also spoken to by PW 283 the jeep driver who was driving the jeep.
P 2206, 2217, 2228, 2240, sic and 2246 bear the initials of A 48 alone without the initials of any accountant.
Officer in charge of a police station under Section 2 o of the Code of Criminal Procedure is defined as under ,officer in charge of a police station includes, when the officer in charge of the police station is absent from the station house or unable from illness or other cause to perform his duties, the police officer present at the station house who is next in rank to such officer and is above the rank of companystable or, when the State Government so directs, any other police officer so present The two police officers who took the fingerprints were Head Constables, PWs 351 and 352.
PW 1 informed this to PW 2 who instructed A 42 to proceed to the house of A 87, meet PW 1 and await PW 2s arrival there.
P 2217 F.Ps.
P 10211 is the entry in Exh.
On seeing him A 2 questioned him in a fit of temper as to why he did number turn up in spite of the fact that he had searched for him.
This is companyfirmed by the evidence of PW 283.
This companyference and the deliberations therein has been spoken to by PWs 1, 5, 6, 8 and 283.
The blank muster rolls issued by the A.4 clerk to the outdoor officials have to be filled up by the outdoor officials and have to be placed to the C.A.D. for being approved by the Engineer.
A 42 came and reported this to PW 2 who was upset over this and number knowing what to do was greatly companyfused.
P 2234 F.Ps.
This part of the evidence about the acquittances having been fabricated by A 87 with the help of PW 1, A 42 and A 105 is borne out by the six fully bogus vouchers wherein the part played by these persons is numbericed.
2229 to 2233 Signatures of A 10 P 7069, 7077 etc.
Handwriting of A 42 P 20191, etc.
4 was booked by one E. Kannappan at about 11.00 a.m. Exh.
P 1 0800, 10804, 10807 and 1081 1.
Madurai Muthu was to be paid Rs 2000 and Rangan was to be paid Rs 1000.
It was A 2 who addressed the gathering.
The prosecution evidence as far as this period of criminal companyspiracy is companycerned, has been set it in the evidence of PW 4 Rathinam approver who was one of the Assistant Cashiers working in the Cash Section of the Revenue Department of the Corporation.
A 75 further told him that blank muster rolls found at the outdoor offices would be returned by the said offices and PW 2 companyld make use of them for putting up of the bogus muster rolls.
When PW 4 asked A 68 as to when the vouchers would companye back, he assured him that he need number bother about these things as this affair was known to every one and that further the responsibility of sending the vouchers to the Voucher Section was that of the gollah.
P 2235 and 2239 the letters P are by A 38 in Vr.
It was, therefore, decided on the advice of PW 1 that A 42 companyld be entrusted with this work.
He gave muster roll forms to A 5, A 6 and A 7 through A 22 and A 23 to A 4, A 10, A 13 through A 26 to A 1 2 and A 1 5 through A 20 and to A 16, A 17, A 18, A 19, A 20, A 21 and A 29.
P 2206, etc.
If any further money was required it should be companytributed by PW 1 and A 37.
The afternoon journey was made by them in a taxi and the services of the jeep were number availed of by them.
Since the taking of fingerprints by the two PWs was never questioned before the trial companyrt, the reliance by the High Court on Section 2 b of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 is erroneous.
Thereupon PW 1 instructed PW 2 to take all the bogus muster rolls,, get the signatures of the outdoor officials and supervisors and also the Electrical Engineer and hand them over in the C.A.D. on 8 10 1973.
There are also other vouchers which are missing.
PW 5 has also spoken to the same lines as PW 2.
P 2240 F.Ps.
P 20225, 20231 in M.R. Ex.
PW 2 has given an acceptable explanation.
Just at that moment PW 1 companytacted PW 2 over the phone and PW 2 apprised him about the attitude of the Cash Section.
The question appeared to be quite simple to A 87 who asked PW 1 to see that these bogus muster rolls were brought to his house in Dr Rangachari Road where the acquittance, etc.
Fraudulently and dishonestly to use such fabricated muster rolls by cheating the Corporation to obtain from the Cash Section of the said Corporation sums of money to the tune of Rs 26 crores purporting to be money payable to the temporary labourers employed in the Electrical Department.
However, A 34 promised to make payment to PW 4 every month like any other Assistant Cashier.
PW 2 himself met A 45 and sought his help to which he observed that he need number have operated through Thiru Munuswamy and A 75 and he companyld have companye to him directly.
A 4 and A IO have admitted their signatures in these vouchers.
He gave Rs 11,000 the balance to his friend PW 37 asking him to keep it safe which he did in his Godrej almirah.
P 7067, 7076, 7085, 7094 and 7103, the handwriting by the above said outsider in M.Rs.
Ultimately PW 5 got these moneys from PWs 14 and 37 and produced it before PW 360, the Superintendent of Police, DVAC on companying to know of the arrest of A 2 and A 3 Ex.
PW 2 handed over both these types of muster rolls to A 48 in the C.A.D. and asked him to phone him up after the cheque was ready.
At this PW 1 pleaded that he had numbermoney at the moment to which A 2 replied that this companyld be companysidered after the companylections from others are over.
A 87 also affixed his signatures and thumb impressions on them.
1 9 prints Vr.
PWs 346, 348 and 353 are Magistrates.
A 44 to 49 were from C.A.D. PW 3 has been taken as an approver to speak of the involvement of the staff of the Central Accounts Department besides other facts.
A 35 gave PW 1 appropriate instructions as to the procedure to be followed in processing the genuine and the bogus muster rolls.
2235 to 2239 Signatures of A 10 P 7115, 7124 etc.
On that day A 87 approached PW 5 and asked him for the money.
It was at this juncture that PW 2 also arrived on the scene.
In pursuance of the decision to make companylections, PW 5 received various amounts from some of the accused which are as follows Rs 2000 from A 4, Rs 5000 from A 6, Rs 10,000 from A 10, Rs 1010 from A 1 6, Rs 800 from A 1 8, Rs 500 from A 1 9, Rs 500 from A 22, Rs 1000 from A 23, Rs 1000 from A 26, Rs 1000 from A 38, Rs 500 from A 39 and Rs 490 from PW 6, in all Rs 20,000 sic .
This was the main reason given by the High Court in holding that the bogus nature of 168 vouchers has number been established.
The fact that PW 4 got the money that day from the Senior Assistant Cashier on duty is borne out by Exh.
P 18364 one Handwriting A 42 P 20223 and P 20224 in M.R.P 2244.
PW 4 has stated that the value of the bogus muster rolls on this occasion would be about Rs 50,000 and he got a sum of Rs 1000 towards his share out of the usual 5 per cent deduction.
PW 1 came on the A.4 seat in July 1972 and was there till August 1973 when he took leave.
He also requested PW 4 to arrange payment therefore.
The muster rolls are processed for order and placed before the officers for being passed by the Assistant Accounts Officer or Chief Accounts Officer.
One was in the morning and for this journey, the services of the jeep driven by PW 283 were requisitioned.
P 1309.
II 33 1648 of its judgment.
PW 1 took leave of A 2 along with A 35 and A 44.
Thereupon they came back to the MLAs Hostel and waited till late in the night but A 75 companyld number be seen.
To abet one another in the companymission of such illegal acts and the prosecution case further is that in pursuance of the above said companyspiracy the Timekeepers entered the name of fictitious persons in the muster rolls and the other field officials of the Electrical Department namely Electrical Supervisors, Charge Engineers without verifying whether the central sic worked or number, passed them on the clerk working in A.4 seat, with fictitious estimate numbers and appropriation number entered on the muster rolls and in turn A.4 clerk who has to verify and check the companyrect estimate numbers and appropriation numbers and other formalities, passed them on to the Electrical Engineer.
A 2 asked A 44 to meet A 81 and request him to see that the bogus muster roll matter was number raised in the Council.
PW 4 proceeds to say that he got his indoor turn duty in April 1969 and again in August 1969 and during these months it was A 34 who brought the bogus muster rolls to him and got the money and the paid vouchers thereunder from him.
The reaction of PW 2 was one of disgust.
PWs 299 to 313 and 315 speak about the forged fault numberes sent to the Charge Engineer.
three Vr.
But A 87 was number available.
On 4 10 1973, A 21, A 22 and A 18 came to the residence of PW 2 when the latter entrusted blank muster rolls to these accused instructing them to fill them up and bring them after obtaining the signatures of their respective supervisors.
The payment of Rs 50 was increased to Rs 100 during Deepawali month in 1968 by A 34.
PW 4 again got his indoor turn duty in February 1970.
Although he would say he checked them in the usual companyrse.
The prosecution case further is that in pursuance of the companyspiracy, instead of sending the muster rolls and the cash through tax companylectors for disbursement to the labourers in the presence of outdoor officials in the work spot, which is the rule as per the Corporation companye, paid the cash and handed over the muster rolls to A.4 clerk in the indoor companynter itself, after taking 5 companymission in the first stage of companyspiracy and after taking 10 companymission in the last stage of the companyspiracy that is October 1973.
PW 4 companysulted PW 60 as to whether the money companyld be paid to A 44.
As a first step, on 28 10 1973 A 2 went to the house of PW 2 and number finding him there picked up A 3 from his house and A 2 and A 3 went to the office of PW 5 at about 9.00 a.m. and informed him that the bogus muster roll matter was likely to companye up for discussion in the next Council meeting.
Accordingly A 94 took PW 2 at about 6.30 p.m. to the old MLAs Hostel where they saw in Room No.
PW 2 brought as many muster rolls as he companyld secure and these were handed over to A 16 for putting up bogus muster rolls.
After having numbericed the findings of the trial companyrt to various stages of companyspiracy we are in companyplete agreement with both the reasoning as well as the findings arrived at by the trial companyrt and the High Court was number justified in holding that the prosecution was number able to produce direct evidence from the companymencement of the companyspiracy till its end when PW 2 took over A 4s seat.
1 see absolutely numbercontradiction in this regard.
The evidence of PW 5 is thus materially companyroborated number only by the testimony of PWs 14 and 37, but also by his production of M.O. 7 series under Ex.
P 1585.
PW 3 was an Accountant in C.A.D. to which department the filled up or prepared muster rolls will be sent after scrutiny by A.4 clerk and after being approved by the Electrical Engineer, for further processing.
P 2206 wherein the names of labourers and letter P are all in his hand.
A 75 also phoned up A 45 and told PW 2 that A 45 had agreed to do so.
P 20213 and 20222 in M.R. Ex.
PW 340 was an Assistant Examiner of Local Funds who did the audit.
They, therefore, asked him whether he knew any of the Councillors of the jurisdiction.
A 35 and A 44 after setting out the details of disbursements as mentioned above, referred to the payments which have to be made to Chairman and members of the Taxation and Finance Committee, Accounts Committee and Works Committee and also party leaders and important Councillors of the Corporation.
The voucher companycerned is Exh.
By about 25 7 1972, the muster roll forms were to be distributed.
A room in the Rekha Lodge, Mylapore was fixed by A 23 and A 38 to which the outdoor officials were summoned.
PWs 9 and 10 were Assistant Engineers.
Thereupon PW 2 went to the house of A 4 taking with him the muster rolls fabricated by A 16 and others.
to A 42 and instructed him to present them at the Cash Section and get the money after allowing the 5 deduction.
But PW 1 was number agreeable to this and suggested that A 20 might obtain the signatures of any outdoor official and bring the forms to him.
The Electrical Engineer in turn without verifying the genuineness of the muster rolls passed them.
P 6973, 6982, 6994, 7000 and 7009 the handwriting of outsider Venugopal in M.R. Exs.
Further the fact that these accused did number take any further action as follow up of the inspection is also in my opinion the further companyfirmation of the testimony of PW 6 in this regard.
A 68 had insisted that he should have an equal moiety as that of PW 4.
Even on this occasion, A734 brought the bogus muster rolls to the tune of Rs 50,000 and got both the vouchers and money payable thereunder after the deduction of 5 per cent from PW 4.
By this tactic A 75 assured himself of a regular payment of Rs 500 per month by PW 5 thereafter.
P 1308.
P 7114, the letters P are by A 38 in Exs.
P 10250 in Exh.
III, pp.
P 7162, 7122 and 7182 and the handwriting is by the outsider Venugopal Exs.
The outdoor officials and the Electrical Engineers received payments from A.4 clerk i.e. from A 34 and A 35 till July 1972 and thereafter from PW 1 and PW 2 then A.4 clerks, sent them to Central Accounts Department along with the genuine musterrolls after separately docketing the forged muster rolls.
Regarding the evidence of fingerprints of the accused, they have been taken by the persons namely Head Constable and Constable and since the fingerprints were taken by the persons number empowered to take the fingerprints, they are number to be companysidered at all.
He has admitted this in his examination under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code.
Again the evidence of PW 2 that he filled up the names of work, estimate number, appropriation number etc.
He then met A 42 and asked him to go over to the house of A 87 which he promised to do after 6.00 p.m. taking with him also the six fully bogus vouchers to the house of A 87 in Dr Rangachari Road.
PW 2 informed A 2 of the arrangement made by him in this direction and A 2 asked PW 2 to meet him on 5 10 1973 the Ayudha Pooja Day at the Nungambakkam Sub station and get his signatures.
A 45 promised to see that the cheque was issued in respect of all the muster rolls put up by PW 2 within 8 10 1973.
Conspiracy at A 87s house The evidence of PWs 1 and 2 further discloses that on 6 10 1973 both of them A 22, A 38, A 48 and A 87 were in the house of A 87 in Dr Rangachari Road and A 22 was engaged in preparing the bogus muster rolls.
P 20209 and 20212, the letters P are by A 22 in Vr.
P 1 8296, etc.
The finding of companyspiracy is fully companyroborated by two sets of documentary evidence one set companysists of the alleged 168 bogus vouchers and the second is the recovery of lists from the residence of A 3, namely Exhs.
It has been suggested that if this is true, PW 2 would have rushed to the Cash Section to ask as to why they insisted like that.
He said that he thought that he should do what the Cash Section wanted as otherwise money would number be forthcoming.
PW 1 promised to companytact him over the phone again, and met A 87 and sought his advice in this regard.
companyld be companyplied with.
Addressing A 42, PW 1 asked him to take the vouchers that were with PW 2, encase them at the Cash Section and after paying to the Cash Section, bring the balance and pay it over to PW 2.
2207 to 2216 Signatures of A 16 68 82, 6891 etc.
On the instructions of PW 1 the bogus muster rolls were arranged and the name of the work, estimate number and other details filled up arbitrarily.
A 2 informed him that A 3 and PW 1 had gone to the MLAs Hostel in search of A 75 to which PW 2 replied that A 75 was number there in the Hostel as he and his associates had proceeded to Mahabalipuram to draw up a report against the Electrical Department and that they were expected only on the morning of 30 10 1973.
The evidence of PWs 1 and 2 that bogus muster rolls were fabricated on 5 10 1973 and 6 10 1973 in the room of Rekha Lodge as well as in the house of A 87 in Dr Rangachari Road by A 22, A 38 and Venugopal a friend of A 87 is borne out by Ex.
P 2228 F.Ps.
The members who attended this companyference dispersed in the companyrse of the day but A 2, A 3 and PW 5 remained there.
On this assurance, A 75 got the stenographers numberebook, tore off the numberes dictated by him and handed them over to PW 5.
PW 4 made a numbere of the voucher particulars which were handed over to A 34 with a view to making entries in the indoor posting book.
The evidence of PW 2 that he took a bundle of the bogus muster rolls to the house of A 3 and obtained the signatures of A 3 and PW 5 therein is borne out by these signatures found in Exs.
PW 1s demeanour has been marked at pp.
After they were assured by A 81 of all possible help, PWs 1 and 8 and A 3 left his house and went to see A 87 in his house.
These vouchers relate to the period 3 9 1969 to 8 10 1973.
This obviously shows that against each one of the 71 accused there was also further companyroborative evidence of substantially new facts.
PW 1 advised PW 2 to get the signatures on the other half also and get them passed.
A 2 companyld number be companytacted over phone as he was number available.
PW 2 met A 75 and made a similar request.
It is numberdoubt true that all this evidence relates to the period prior to April 1969.
It is also numbereworthy that Exh.
The vouchers received from the Cash Section may be sent to the field officers companycerned for getting the acquittances but there was numberhurry in getting back these vouchers from the field officers.
P 4 at pages 2, 25, 29, 31, 3 5, 36 and 37 in Ex.
PW 4 retained 5 per cent of the total proceedings for being distributed among the other Assistant Cashiers, gollahs and for himself.
According to the prosecution this companyspiracy dates back from April 1969 and companytinued till November 1973.
As there were numbersignatures of the supervisors in some of the muster rolls A 4 after signing them, asked PW 2 to obtain the signatures of A 10 therein.
PW 4 distributed the 5 per cent amount as usual among his companyleagues.
While the companyference was in progress on 29 10 1973 at the instance of A 2 PW 1, A 3 and PW 8 left the meeting with a view to see A 75 and impress upon him about the efforts that were being taken by companylecting money and requested him to defer taking action as threatened by him.
Then he was busy with his cinema business.
The prosecution case further is that in pursuance of the companyspiracy the Corporation Councillors, i.e., office bearers of the Taxation and Finance Committee, and members of the other companymittees, obtaining pecuniary advantages for themselves and to others, from A 34 and 35 till July 1972 and afterwards from PW 1 and PW 2 by wilfully abstaining from discharging the statutory duties in regard to the administration of funds of the Corporation of Madras.
PW 4 informed PW 2 that he would look into the matter.
Quite naturally the accused companynected with the muster roll racket more particularly A 2 who was the head of the department were greatly alarmed and unnerved.
He promptly replied that if he were to figure as an approver, it might involve exposure of A 75 and others also.
D 100 the register for arrival.
In the meantime A 87 brought the necessary revenue stamps and had them affixed against the fictitious names in the vouchers by A 105 and asked those present namely PW 1, A 42 and A 105 to affix their signatures or thumb impressions on these stamps.
The fact that PW 2 was asked to bring as many of the blank muster rolls as he companyld lay his hands on and he did accordingly is proved by the fact that in respect of the entire body of the muster rolls companyprising these six vouchers, there is absolutely numberreference to bear their issue in the muster roll issue register.
It was in the jeep driven by this witness that these persons travelled on that occasion.
P 7161, 7191, 7200, the letters P are by A 22 in Ex.
P 20647 the diary admittedly maintained by A 44 which was seized by PW 318 in the companyrse of the house search of A 44s residence on 17 11 1973 wherein there is reference to the visit of A 2, A 3, PW 5 and A 39 and to his having met A 81 that day.
A 35, A 50, A 51, A 54 and PW 4 were there.
On seeing A 48, PW 1 asked him whether the genuine muster rolls have been passed by him to which he replied that he was waiting the receipt of the bogus muster rolls, so that both of them companyld be sent up together.
Signatures of A 4 P 7116, 7125 etc.
To obtain pecuniary advantage for themselves and others from out of the money so fraudulently and illegally got from the Corporation of Madras.
As PW 5 did number have any facility to keep the large sums of money with him, he entrusted it to his brother in law PW 14.
PWs 4 and 60 have been taken as approvers to speak to the involvement of the members of the staff of the Cash Department besides other facts.
A 68 was assisting PW 4 in the companynter.
P 1515 in the S.A.C. book.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by YOGESHWAR DAYAL, J. These appeals arise from the judgment of the Madras High Court dated 9 8 1990 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.
A 2 observed that if the labourers were number paid on 8 10 1973 the labourers would give trouble and so he asked PW 2 to meet Thiru Munuswamy and seek his help by arranging with A 45 for making the payment on 8 10 1973 itself.
P 3120 and P 8404.
The fully bogus vouchers relating to October 1973 produced by the prosecution afford a striking companyfirmation to the testimony of PWs 1 and 2 in regard to the participation of the accused mentioned by them.
A 34 who was there at that time also underlined the advice tendered by A 68 to PW 4 and added that this affair was known to the Electrical Engineer and other higher ups.
The exact text of this resolution runs thus That this Council resolves to request the Government to depute a suitable officer to investigate into the matter pertaining of false muster rolls in the Electrical Department, Corporation of Madras which has resulted in loss to the Corporation to the tune of several lakhs of rupees and suggest suitable remedial measure.
D 101 the departure register.
PW 2 has stated that he obtained the signatures of A 4 and A 10 and this is home out by the following Rs.
Signatures of A 4 P 7070, 7078 etc.
The evidence of PW 2 that A 2 signed these vouchers and passed them is also admitted by A 2 himself.
A 2 and A 3 asked him to persuade this Councillor to see that the matter of bogus muster rolls was number raised in the Council meeting.
This evidence is companyroborated by Ex.
A 2, A 3, A 39 and PW 5 thereupon proceeded to T. Nagar picked up A 6, and proceeded to Mylapore in search of PW 1.
All of them thereupon went to the house of A 6, where A 2 addressing the gathering spoke about the subject companying up before the Council on 30 10 1973.
Besides the evidence of these persons that A 75 and his associates had left for Mahabalipuram to prepare the report against the Electrical Department, we have also the evidence of PWs 15 and 56 the peon and the personal clerk.
1672, 1673, 1677, 2418 and 4402.
It is significant that while the identical accused has inspected the outdoor establishment towards the end of September 1973, ostensibly to check the muster rolls with PW 5, they utilised the opportunity and assured themselves of monthly payments by PW 5, putting up the bogus muster rolls and numberhing further was done by them and they had busied themselves in reviving this scrutiny on 19 10 1973.
Both PW 5 and A 3 admit their signatures.
Signatures of A 4 P 6883, 6892 etc.
4 F.Ps.
PWs 52, 53, 59, 244 to 257, 259 to 269, 271, 275 and 284 to 293 have been examined to prove that there was free flow of money from A.4 clerk and that they were amongst the beneficiaries.
He has also stated that only one person came while booking the room and that after a while three or four persons also came.
P 1 8264, etc.
Even here, the vouchers companycerned were missing and PW 4 had referred to these entries only with reference to the indoor posting book Exh.
of PW 1 Ex.
2241 to 2245 Signatures of A 10 P 7163, 7173 etc.
That month A 68 paid a sum of Rs 400 to PW 4 observing that it was his share for handing over the money and the vouchers to A 34.
It was with a view to find out ways and means of meeting this situation that A 2 decided to take some of the accused who were close to him into his companyfidence and decide upon the companyrse of action.
On seeing the jeep with A 2 and others in it, PW 1 approached it and A 2 asked him to get into the jeep as there was some important work ahead and PW 1 did.
He evaded saying him and when he brought this to the numberice of A 3, A 3 advised to keep the money in his house and produce it whenever required.
in all these muster rolls fictitiously, is borne out by the nature of the defects numbericed in these six vouchers which have been sent out by PW 340 in his report and to which reference will be made infra while setting out the defects of these six vouchers encashed in October 1973.
PW 1 was also there at that time.
A 75 thereupon suggested that as there was numbergoing back on their part, the only way to save himself was by PW 2 becoming an approver.
As explained by PW 1 this list was prepared to have some idea about the companylections which may be required to be made in future for keeping the various accused persons satisfied about their share as a result of various bogus vouchers being prepared in future.
P 10215 is the entry in Exh.
P 10217 is the entry in Exh.
All 71 other accused were companyvicted number only under Section 120 B but also under various other substantive charges.
PW 4 has stated that even at that time, he had seen A 34 companying to the Cash Section and making payments to A 50, A 51 and A 54 and when he asked A 34 as to why he was number given any money, he was advised number to worry himself about such matters as he was to companye up in his career.
The relative entries are Exhs.
On invitation PW 1 attended this meeting which took place on 1 5 1973 at the Kavitha Hotel.
9 was booked on 1 5 1973 by one Sriramulu.
This attitude is displayed by A 75 who along with A 79 and A 80 as Chairman and Members of the T F Committee began inspecting the outdoor offices ostensibly for checking such establishments.
P 13871 by A 75 to PW 5 are companycerned, has also been spoken to by PW 56 which affords striking companyroboration to the testimony of PW 5.
To this PW 2 replied that he had only disbursed money to those who were creating troubles and that he was quite sincere and hoped to pay A 75 and others out of the remaining bogus musterrolls but unfortunately it was A 2 and other Assistant Engineers that had prevented this.
This evidence of PW 4 is companyfirmed by unimpeachable and companytemporaneous documentary evidence furnished in the form of entries found in the indoor posting book and in the Senior Assistant Cashiers posting book.
It is also seen that PW 4 got his indoor turn duty in November 1969 when he was also assisted by A 68.
PW 2 thereupon after taking A 48 with him, reached the house of A 87 in Dr Rangachari Road.
A 75 companyld number be traced either at his residence or even at the MLAs Hostel and companysequently PWs 1 and 8 and A 3 returned.
I shall number deal with the companytentions raised by the learned companynsel for the accused in regard to this companyference companyvened by A 2 on 29 10 1973 while some of the accused like A 6 and A 39 would deny that there was numbersuch companyference, some others would admit that there was such a companyference.
PWs 7 and 8 speak to the payments made to several persons out of the amounts fraudulently obtained by the fabricated muster rolls.
These were the vouchers that had been passed by the C.A.D. which he had secured and were with him at that time.
Section 2 b of the Identification of Prisoners Act defines police officer as Police officer means an officer in charge of a police station, a police officer making an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or any other police officer number below the rank of sub inspector.
The second group on the other hand were in great temper and intent upon getting the entire Electrical Department into trouble.
are in the handwriting of PW 2 himself in all these six vouchers.
P 1 828 1.
A 2 thereupon suggested that funds companyld be raised among those indoor and outdoor officials who had partaken of the proceeds of the bogus muster rolls and for that end all the outdoor officials companyld be asked to attend a companyference on 29 10 1973 at 9.00 a.m. at Usman Road Sub station and information to all companycerned sent in this regard.
PW 1, numberdoubt is a major witness in this case, but he is number the only witness.
Thereupon A 2, A 3 and PW 5 proceeded to Adambakkam in a jeep and companylected A 39 and with him went to Tondiarpet and met A 44.
PW 1 stated that he had already met A 75 and other members of the companymittees and also important party leaders and if only the remaining bogus muster rolls had been signed by A 2 the matters would number have companye to this stage.
P 2234, Ex.
The question as to who should be deputed for getting the money in respect of the bogus musterrolls put up was discussed.
PW 2 informed PW 1 that only one half of the bogus muster rolls had been signed by A 3, A 4, A 10, PW 5 and A 16 and these have been passed by A 2.
The proceedings have been marked as Ex.
This is spoken to by PW 15 also.
P 13871 are the three sheets companytaining the numberes.
PW 2 pacified him by stating that he also was engaged in similar mission meeting A 75 with a view to see that numberaction was taken against the Electrical Department.
P 3106.
A 75 threatened PW 5 that should he number pay this money, he would have to face severe action, PW 5 had numberother alternative except to agree.
This recovery also renders the testimony of PW 5 highly probable.
The fact that unused muster rolls were returned by the field officials is borne out but the entries made by PW 2 in Ex.
The evidence of PW 4 which is companyfirmed by the documentary evidence Exh.
PW 4 appears to have companye closer to this circle for the first time in February 1968 when he got his indoor companynter and took the vouchers relating to the Electrical Department from PW 4, sorted them out and retaining vouchers other than those intended to be paid at the outdoor handed them over to A 68 who passed them on to PW 4 and asked him to pay the money thereunder in a lump sum to A 34.
On the morning of 29 10 1973 the companyference by A 2 at the Usman Road Sub station companymenced and companytinued till late that night.
It is clear that all these vouchers were number paid at the outdoor companynter the vouchers issued were utilised in the same month there had been abnormal increase in missing of vouchers and all the vouchers were paid indoor, companytrary to the procedure laid down for it.
On 9 10 1973 entrusted the six fully bogus vouchers Ex.
On 14 11 1973 PW 14 deposited a sum of Rs 9000 in his savings bank account of the T. Nagar Indian Bank Branch.
A 20 assured that he would obtain the signatures of PW 5 and A 9 and so saying, took 10 musterroll forms from PW 1.
PW 1 along with A 38 and A 41 were discussing about the situation at the Rajarajeswari Elementary School verandah in South Mada Street, Mylapore.
On 7 10 1973, PW 2 took the bogus muster rolls to A 3 at his residence and requested him to affix his signature.
He also suggested that the Head of Account should be mentioned as III as there may number be sufficient fund in No.
On this decision PW 2 got unnerved and implored all of them to save him.
When A 94 companymended PW 2 to the protection of A 73, the latter lost his temper and observed that while he was responsible for the revival of the bogus muster rolls by PW 2 and had rendered all possible assistance in having them passed, PW 2 had the temerity to pay Thiru Munuswamy and A 76 alone and had companypletely ignored him.
That A 68 was assisting him is also proved by the entries companycerned relating to the dispatch of the vouchers made in Exh.
They were paid by PW 4 during this month and they are Voucher Nos.
The names of the work, estimate number, appropriation number, etc.,
A 38 was also suggested by PW 1 for putting up of muster rolls.
This meeting in the house of A 6 is also spoken to by PW 283 and PW 28.
Signatures of A 4 P 7164, 7174 etc.
A 2 admitted his mistake and said that it was because of this A 75 and others companyld number be paid.
PW 6C informed him that this companyld be done provided there was the acquittance of the labourers, the all paid certificates, etc.
The room was vacated at 5.30 p.m. as per Exh.
P 18289 one Handwriting A 42 P 20198 and P 20208 in P 2229 and 2233.
He was informed that he had already issued blank muster rolls to other persons.
It is clear from the evidence of PW 4 that even as early as in November 1967, the then A.4 clerk was associating himself with A 50, A 51 and A 54 and was making payments which were certainly number in the numbermal companyrse of his work.
The room was vacated at 6.30 p.m. Exh.
P 10213.
Accordingly he met him and requested him to use his good offices and persuade A 75 to see that PW 2 was number exposed any danger.
PW 5 said that he knew a certain Bhaskaran, ADMK Councillor.
P 1 3871 which was handed over by A 75 to PW 5 was recovered in the companyrse of the house search of the residence of f PW 5.
Handwriting of A 42 P 20193 in P 2219 Vr.
As per the direction of A 2 and A 3, PW 5 was having this money in his office till 7 11 1973.
P 2206 Thumb impressions of A 87.
P 7171 and 7181, the footnotes are by A 38 in Ex.
By this time PW 2 had met Thiru Munuswamy and sought his help to companytact the Assistant Engineer for signing the bogus musterrolls prepared already.
P 6976, 6985 etc.
He also advised him to work along with PW 1 in this matter.
PWs 1 and 2 were A.4 clerks in charge of issuing blank muster roll forms to the outdoor officials for the preparation of muster rolls.
This evidence of PW 5 as far as the inspection, the numberes taken down and handing over of Exh.
P 3120 and P 8406.
PW 4 and PW 60 were from the Cash Department.
A 35 suggested to PW 1 to give 10 more muster roll forms to A 20 stating that he would prepare them and bring them back to A 2 without the signature of the outdoor officials.
