1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 307 OF 2010 Our Lady of Velankanni and Perpetual Succor Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. ... Applicant Orig.complainant Vs. Mr. K.Baburaj Kannappan & Ors. ... Respondents Orig.accused. Ms. R.V.Pradhan, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP, for the respondentNo.6 - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 17th June, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The revision applicant before this Court is the original complainant. Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are the original accused. It is alleged that without any authority, they had opened a bank account in the name of the Society i.e. the complainant and have operated the same for some time. Later on, that account was also closed. The learned Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, issued process under Sections 420, 465 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. against all the accused persons. That order was challenged by the accused in Revision 2 Application No.1029/2009. The learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the Revision Application and set aside the order to issue process. That order is challenged by the original complainant in this Application. 3. It appears that in the beginning of the year 2006, the general body of the Society had constituted a committee of 9 members to run the day to day functions and management of the Society including the financial affairs. According to the complaint, the bank account could be opened only by the Chairman, Secretary and treasurer of the society. None of the applicants were holding this position. It is contended that for the purpose of opening the account, they had forged certain documents and cheated. The learned Additional Sessions Judge noted that the disputes were going on between the parties before the Deputy registrar, Co-operative Societies for the control of the Society. It is contention of the Chairman of the complainant-society that as per bye-laws no such account could be opened by any of the accused. However, it is an admitted fact that they were members in the 9-member Committee which was constituted by the General Body. Nothing is stated as to when that resolution was withdrawn by the General Body of the Society. Further, there is nothing to show that by opening the account, the society or anybody was cheated and any property was delivered. No material was brought on record to show that any document was forged and was 3 used for the purpose of opening the account. Taking into consideration the material on record, I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order. 4. Therefore, the Revision Application stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)