BHUVANESWARI FINANCE Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall govern both the criminal appeals, namely, C.A.Nos.1759 and 1760 of 2002.The appellants, who were ranked as A1 to A3 in C.C.No.11 of 2001 wherein they along with four others stood charged and tried under Section 5 of TNPID Act and Sections 120(B) r/w 420 and 406 I.P.C against 2 to 7 and A1 was found guilty under Section 5 of TNPID Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.60000/-, while the second and third accused were found guilty under Section 5 of TNPID Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for six years and to pay a fine of Rs.60000/- in default to undergo S.I for a period of six months and A2 and A3 were acquitted of the other charges levelled against them and all other accused, namely, A4 to A7 were acquitted of all the charges levelled against them, have brought forth these appeals.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals can be stated as follows:

(3.) In order to prove the charges levelled against the accused, the prosecution examined 38 witnesses and marked 181 exhibits. No M.Os were marked. The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. as to the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Three witnesses were examined on the side of the accused. The second accused examined himself as D.W.1, wherein he has stated that he was the sole Proprietor of the first accused and the other accused have no connection with the Financial Establishment; that all the receipts for discharge were with PW1; that due to enmity between him and PW1, a false case has been foisted against him and his family members. D.W.2 Azhagesan and D.W.3 Rajakan have deposed that only A2 was carrying on the business in the name of Sri Bhuvaneswari Finance and others were nothing to do with the same. On consideration of the rival submissions, the lower court found A1 to A3 guilty and sentenced them as stated above and had acquitted A4 to A7. Aggrieved A1 to A3 have brought forth these appeals.