A Delhi court on Wednesday convicted Rajendra Bharti, a Madhya Pradesh Congress member, in a case related to fraud and forgery of bank records.
Special judge Dig Vinay Singh of the Ross Avenue court convicted Bharti and former treasurer Raghuveer Prajapati on charges of criminal conspiracy, cheating and forgery.
The case, which was registered in 2015 in Madhya Pradesh’s Datia, was transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court in October last year after it noted allegations of efforts being made to intimidate defense witnesses.
In a 95-page ruling, the court said that Bharti and Prajapati, along with other unidentified persons, entered into a criminal conspiracy with the aim of cheating the complainant bank, Zila Sahkari Krishi Aur Gramin Vikas Bank, by withdrawing interest at a much higher rate.
The court said: “In furtherance of this conspiracy, bank documents, which are valuable securities, were forged, and the forgery was part of the goal of defrauding the bank.”
The prosecution, led by Additional Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat, said Bharti’s late mother, Savitri, was deposited $10 lakh at Zila Sahkari Krishi Aur Gramin Vikas Bank in Datia on August 24, 1998. The deposit was placed in the name of a family-run trust as a fixed deposit (FD) for a period of three years at an interest rate of 13.5% per annum.
The prosecution alleged that the defendant conspired to extend high interest payments indefinitely by physically manipulating bank records, such as ledgers, receipts and corresponding papers.
“Bharti, who served as the bank’s president during the fraud, used his position to pressure employees and facilitate unauthorized payments to his family trust,” the court noted, noting that co-accused Prajapati’s initials were found next to the tampered-with sections of records where the correction fluid was applied.
The court rejected the defense’s argument that the defendants were public officials who enjoyed immunity from prosecution in the absence of government approval.
“Committing a punishable offense can never be considered part of the official duties of a public servant… Since forgery involves the creation of false documents and fraud involves deception, such acts are dereliction of duty and not performance of duty,” the court said.
The court is scheduled to hear arguments on the amount of the penalty on Thursday.
