1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 2576/2010 Shrishail Siddharam Mahamure v. State. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr Priyal G.Sarda, Adocate for the Applicant. Mrs A. S.Pai, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 9TH JUNE, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions at length on this application for anticipatory bail preferred by original accused No.2 apprehending his arrest in CR No.30/2010 for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 408, 464, 471, 477 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 2. Said offence was registered at the instance of Director of one Kamla Co- operative Bank Ltd, Sholapur (“Bank” for short) alleging commission of offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust against the present applicant when being a Cashier cum Clerk with the said Bank and also alleging similar offences against one Aiyaz Sheikh, Assistant Manager of the same Bank and one Mohan 2 Waghmare, Peon (since deceased) working with the same Bank allegedly without there being any valid documents on record to secure the payment by way of over draft/loan there was siphoning of more than Rs.16 lakhs by the accused persons. This happened only during the span of two months from April,2009 to June,2009. This must have happened only because one Aiyaz Khan, Assistant Manager was the senior most employee in the said Bank and the applicant was Cashier cum Clerk. In fact, per se it is the case of cheating and misappropriation of money by the employees of the Bank. 3. During the arguments, learned Advocate, Mr Priyal G.Sarda, for the applicant submitted that the applicant had deposited an amount of about Rs. 3,50,000/- towards repayment of such defalcated amount. According to him, the applicant has taken pecuniary advantage from the Bank only to the extent of the said amount of Rs.3,50,000/- and nothing more. Even if such statement is accepted, on its face value, still the offence has already been committed by the applicant being in the employment of the Bank. Even otherwise also such payment may not absolve him from any legal liability. Even the conduct of the applicant can be seen inasmuch as to the notice issued by the Bank, he had sent reply on 15th December,2009 through his Advocate, denying each and every allegation and even denying the responsibility of the acts and there is no mention that he had deposited any amount towards satisfaction of such defalcated amount. All the same, in the opinion of this Court, it is not fit a case in which the present anticipatory bail application can be allowed. Hence, the same is disposed of by the following order: :ORDER: (a) Anticipatory Bail application is 3 rejected. (b) Interim orders, if any, earlier passed shall come to an end. (c) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merit of the case at the time of trial. (A.R.JOSHI,J)