A corruption case that lingered for nearly three decades has come to a close, with the Madras High Court acquitting a 90-year-old former Bank of Baroda Chief Manager, finding that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The Court overturned the conviction of V.R. Narayanan, who had been sentenced in 2015 by a Chennai CBI court to one year of simple imprisonment and fined ₹5,000 under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The case stemmed from banking facilities extended to Corium Crafts Private Limited between 1991 and 1994. The company had obtained packing credit and foreign bills purchase facilities from the Industrial Finance Branch of Bank of Baroda in Chennai.
Investigators alleged that the company and its directors diverted funds by projecting non-existent stocks of tobacco and leather. Narayanan, who was serving as Chief Manager, was accused of filing an inspection report that falsely confirmed the presence of goods stored in warehouses in Gujarat.
According to the prosecution, subsequent inspections revealed that the claimed stock was missing. Some warehouse addresses were allegedly fictitious, while one location identified as a storage site was found to be an agricultural field.
Narayanan consistently maintained that the loan arrangement had been approved before he assumed charge of the branch in November 1991. He argued that the sanctioning and monitoring of the credit facilities were handled at the Zonal Office level, while the branch merely processed transactions in accordance with directions received from higher authorities.
While the trial court had relied heavily on Narayanan’s inspection report to convict him, the High Court found several gaps in the prosecution’s case.
The Court noted that the loan application had been submitted and sanctioned months before Narayanan joined the branch. It also observed that the previous Chief Manager, who had recommended the proposal, was neither prosecuted nor examined during the trial.
Evidence from bank officials indicated that major decisions concerning the facility were taken by the Zonal Office. The Court further recorded that Narayanan had, at one stage, withheld certain disbursements and proceeded only after receiving instructions from superior authorities.
A key aspect of the prosecution’s case was the inconsistency between Narayanan’s inspection report prepared in February 1993 and another inspection conducted nearly two years later. The Court held that such a discrepancy, by itself, could not justify a criminal conviction.
The judgment also highlighted the investigating officer’s admission that Narayanan had derived no personal benefit from the transaction. Additionally, the loan amount in question had eventually been repaid.
Concluding that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction, the High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted Narayanan of all charges, bringing an end to a case that had remained under litigation for decades.
