Treasurer of trust jailed for diverting funds

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Chennai:03.03.2020

The chief judicial magistrate of Coimbatore has convicted a treasurer of a Nilgiris-based charitable trust to three years of imprisonment with ₹51,000 penalty for diverting foreign funds received by the trust for social services. Sulo C Daniel, treasurer of Reach In the Nilgiris Trust has been directed to undergo the sentencing for violation of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.

According to the prosecution, Sulo has diverted over ₹50 lakh received by the trust as foreign contribution for her personal gain in collusion with the prime accused and chief functionary of the trust Paulson Yesudian. Since Yesudian had left the country and even summons could not be served to him, the prosecution split the cases into two and proceed with the case against Sulo alone.

She was charged for offences under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) r/w Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) of IPC and sections 23(1) and 25 r/w sections 4, 6 and 13 of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act.

Concluding the trial, chief judicial magistrate A S Ravi said, “This court feels that the recipients of money are members, but the purpose for which, the funds were transferred has not been explained and no proper account has been submitted for the amounts spent and the purpose for which, those funds were diverted to them also not explained.”

This apart, it is also not explained that as to why and as to how, the funds were diverted to personal account of the members of the society and Sulo. Dishonestly converting the society funds, entrusted with the accused, into the personal account is itself an offence, which constitutes the ingredients under section 405 (criminal breach of trust) of IPC, the court added.

Noting that the offence cannot be rectified by redepositing the money into the society account, the court said, “By redepositing the said amount, Sulo forced this court to believe the prosecution that she misappropriated the society funds. Even assuming that it was spent for the welfare of the society or for the purpose of the society, they should have produced account for the money spent.”