Chennai: CBI court sends 2 ex-bank officials, 2 others to 4-16 years in jail

Chennai, July 1 An Additional Special CBI Court in Chennai has sentenced two former Bank of Maharashtra officials and two others to four to 16 years of varying jail terms in a Rs 1.71 crore bank fraud, an official said on Tuesday.

The Special Judge convicted and sentenced the four accused: R. Ramesh, the then Assistant General Manager, Bank of Maharashtra; Nirmala, the then bank officer, and two private persons, namely T.S.R. Vasudevan and T. Vetrivel, to 4-16 years Rigorous Imprisonment (RI)

In its verdict, delivered on Monday, the Special Court also imposed a total fine of over Rs 1.04 crore on the convicts.

Vasudevan, a private person, was sentenced to 16 years' RI with a fine of Rs 1 crore, and Bank officials Ramesh and Nirmala were sentenced to 6 years’ RI with a fine of Rs 1.5 lakh each.

Vetrivel, a private person, was sentenced to 4 years’ RI with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. Accused T. Palani died during the trial, and charges against him abated.

The CBI had registered the case on February 28, 2003, based on a complaint from the Bank of Maharashtra.

The Bank had alleged that Vasudevan, proprietor of M/s Lalitha Oils; Palani, proprietor of M/s Tamil Nadu Marketing, and Vetrivel, who claimed to be a representative of ghost firm M/s Vetri Oils, opened Current Account with Bank of Maharashtra, Valmiki Nagar Branch, Chennai, in the name of the proprietorship firm.

In collusion with the accused, bank officials R. Ramesh and Nirmala sanctioned bill purchase facilities beyond their sanctioning power.

Vasudevan and T. Palani misused the same by submitting forged bills in the name of non-existing firm of Vetri Oils and misused the funds, thereby causing wrongful loss to the tune of Rs 1.71 crore.

After investigation, the CBI filed a chargesheet on November 25, 2003, against Vasudevan, Palani, Vetrivel, Ramesh and Nirmala in the Additional Special Court for CBI cases, Chennai.

During the trial accused Vetrivel was absconding, and the case against him was split. Later, the accused surrendered before the Court, and it conducted the trial jointly in both complaints.

The Special Court convicted the accused in both cases.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor