2010appln1576.10.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1576 /2010 (Suresh Tulsiram Kale vs. State of Maharashtra) ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr. S. A. Mohta Adv for applicant. Mr. Khan, A.P.P. for respondent-State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. DATED : 20 th October, 2010. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that he is a Peon working in the bank. Learned counsel invited my attention to the report lodged at police station Ajni Nagpur and it is stated in the report that one Sandeep Sacchidanan Sinha who has approached the bank for seeking cash credit limit and initial cash credit limit was Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs) , subsequently it was extended to Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs). It is alleged in the report that the said Sandeep Sinha mortgaged one flat with the bank and sold the said flat to two persons. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that bare perusal of the report show that the allegations are against Sandeep Sachhidanana Sinha. Learned Advocate for the applicant further submits that the material collected so far by the Investigating Agency is in the nature that the 2010appln1576.10.odt applicant who was working as Peon in the bank, introduced the said Sandeep to open his bank account and strongly recommended for opening his account. 3. Reply is filed by the State. Record is produced. Perused the record. Apart from the role that the applicant introduced Sandeep for opening account and he is guarantor in the transaction of the accused, there is no role attributed to the applicant. Even accepting the statement made in the report, it is reported by the bank official in the report that the cash credit limit was extended from 3 lacs to 5 lacs. The sum and substance of the allegations is also that the documents submitted to the bank were not genuine. 4. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that it is the duty of the higher officers in the bank to verify the record and being in charge of the affairs the higher officers were taking necessary administrative steps such as supervision, inspection of record etc. Learned Advocate for the applicant further submits that the applicant being Peon in the bank was no way concerned with either the administrative function or with the supervisory powers. Only allegation against the applicant is that the applicant stood guarantor to the accused. No other material is placed so as to connect the applicant with the alleged mis-deed of Sandeep Sinha. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that other accused i.e. Branch manager one Khadgi had approached to this Court and protection was granted to Khadgi by order dated 8th 2010appln1576.10.odt September 2010 and the same was confirmed by order dated 1st October 2010. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate the investigating agency as and when directed by the Investigating Agency and he is also ready to follow or obey the conditions as directed by this Court. In view of the submission of the learned Advocate and the perusal of the record, in my opinion primafacie the case is made out. The apprehension of the investigating agency that the applicant may not cooperate with the Investigating Agency and will not be available for further investigation can be taken care of by putting conditions on the applicant. In the result application allowed. The interim protection is confirmed by adding condition that the applicant should attend the police station on every Sunday from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet. JUDGE svk