1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 685 OF 2009 Jineshwara Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. ... Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. .... Respondents. Rishi Bhuta for the Petitioner. Mrs. A. S. Pai, APP for the State. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and A. R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 24TH MARCH, 2009. P.C.: Notice to the respondents. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. By consent, notice made returnable and taken up for hearing forthwith. 4. Ten properties, according to the petitioner, were seized during the investigation and charge sheets were filed before the Special Court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act. 5. The provisions of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of 2 Depositors Act were held not constitutional by this court and an appeal was filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, according to the petitioner, has admitted the appeal and has stayed further prosecution. As such the prosecution against the petitioner is stayed. But he submits that the properties seized are not being protected by the respondents and are now being tresspassed. He made application in the year 2007 before the concerned Judge, who has yet to decide it. Since the properties are seized and the prosecution is launched, we are of the view that those properties are in the custody of the court and it is the duty of the court to protect such properties. 6. Therefore, we allow the petitioner to move application if he has grievance that the properties are not being protected, before the learned Court and the learned Court is directed to take immediate steps to see that the properties in its custody are protected. 7. With this observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (A. R. JOSHI, J.)