1 CR.APL NO.193/2011, 12/2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.193 OF 2011 (Aneel Atmaram Thakre vs. The State) WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.12/2011 (Aneel Atmaram Thakre vs. The State) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. A.S.Salve, Adv., for the applicant. Mr.K.M.Suryawanshi, APP for State. Mr.A.B.Kale, Adv., for R.2 (in Criminal Application No. 12/2011). ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:4-3-2011 1. The accused/applicant seeks discretion in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.170/2010, registered at Shahada Police Station for the offense under Sections 420, 34 of IPC. 2. Learned Counsel submits, the applicant himself is a victim of circumstances as he has been duped by the promoters of the company wherein he too invested his hard earned money. He does not dispute that the complainant in the present 2 CR.APL NO.193/2011, 12/2011 case was one of such depositor a sufferor, who felt to be cheated and duped. 3. Even if the accused/applicant has protest against his mentor, however, for the prima facie facts disclosed against him and he being a Government Employee ( Clerk in the Panchayat Samiti) having acquaintance with the complainant, the complainant parted money time to time with a hope that it will be credited and complainant will be financially well placed. However, few payments are allegedly transmitted by accused, to the credit of his brother-in-law. 4. The affidavit given by the accused applicant to some of the depositors makes case against him. However, for that purpose the infraction of Section 420 and 467 IPC would not be diluted. Custodial interrogation will unearth the racket in the field and ultimate beneficiaries. It is not superficial concert but long drawn chain of several persons, which is 3 CR.APL NO.193/2011, 12/2011 to be unearthed. Application ( No.193/2011) lacks merit, dismissed. 4. Heard Mr.Suryawanshi, learned A.P.P. He informs, Application No. 12/2011 moved by the accused/applicant is for quashing the proceedings wherein interim relief in terms of prayer clause C flows. It is clarified, the interim relief is in respect of the prosecution and the investigation, however, it does not inhibit in the investigator to perform his part of duty, including arrest of the accused/applicant. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/193-11crapl