TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1964 (7) TMI 61
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mma Koshy, P. W. 1 deposited Rs. 8,000/- with the Pathanamthitta Branch of the Adoor Bank Ltd. as fixed deposit in 1951. Sometime in January 1959 the accused who was then the Agent at the Branch forged certain documents to make out that P. W. 1 had applied for and was granted a loan of Ra. 6,000/- on the security of her fixed deposit of Rs. 8.000/- and appropriated this amount for his own use. On 17-8-1959 the Adoor Bank Ltd., was amalgamated with the Bank of New India Ltd. As the accused who continued to be the agent under the new set up, failed in spite of repeated demands, to send a statement regarding the gold loan account of the branch, P. W. 3 the then General Manager 08 the Bank of New India sent two officers of the Bank to look into....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his testimony has practically knocked the bottom out of the prosecution case. 5. The confession of guilt contained in Exts. P. 5, P. 15 and P 16 are also of no help to the prosecution. Under Section 24 of the Evidence Act: "A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession, appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to mm reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re was a threat, inducement or promise, though, the said fact is not strictly proved. This deviation from the strict standards of proof has to exclude forced or induced concessions which sometimes are extorted and put in when there is a lack of direct evidence." The learned Sessions Judge's finding that the confession was voluntary and the, result of remorse and penitence is not justifiable in the face of what in my opinion, is the clearest possible indication of inducement that we see in this case. The accused admitted a large misappropriation of funds in his statement dated 2-1-1960. One would expect that such a revelation would result in the immediate suspension of the culprit while investigations were carried on and proper action....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by P. Ws. 3 and 4 the accused had no landed property in his name and his father had to be brought in if the hypothecation was to cover the entire amount due to the Bank. As undertaken in Ext. P 15 a registered bond (hypothecation) was executed within fifteen days and as requested by the accused in Ext. P. 15 he was permitted to pay the amount In instalments. For this purpose a demand loan account was opened in the accused's name and he remitted a number of instalments. These, as I noted before, offer ample indication that a clear promise to withhold criminal action was given by the management and accepted by the accused and that both parties carried out their respective parts of the bargain. This inference gains additional strength f....