* 1 * ABA.513.2011 6.7.2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 513 OF 2011 Sunil D. Jaithwar ..... Applicant V/S. State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. Y.R. Mishra, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for State-respondent. CORAM :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 6th July, 2011. P.C. :- 1. This is a second application for anticipatory bail by the applicant, his first application having been dismissed by the Sessions Court by its order dated 27th April, 2011. The applicant is one of the accused in Crime No. 34 of 2011 registered with Pen Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477, 409 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. Alongwith the applicant, 40 other persons are arrayed as accused in the complaint. 2. The facts of the prosecution case are as follows :- The Pen Co- operative Urban Bank Ltd, Pen is a 75 years old bank. It had 22 * 2 * ABA.513.2011 6.7.2011 elected Directors, 2 Directors from its employees and 2 expert Directors during financial years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The applicant herein was it’s statutory auditor. He is a Chartered Accountant carrying on profession in the name of M/s. S.D. Jaithwar and Company. He audited the accounts and submitted a false report showing that the bank was running in profits to the extent of Rs.6.82 crores during financial year 2008-09 when the Bank was actually running in losses. Later, pursuant to the directions given by the Commissioner for Co-operatives and Registrar for Co-operatives Societies, Government of Maharashtra, Pune the accounts of the bank came to be reaudited by another firm by name Kirtane and Pandit which submitted its report on 21st February, 2011. As per the report of the second auditor, the bank was actually in loss of Rs.403.18 crores for the financial year 2008-09. In the subsequent years i.e. 2009-10, though the bank was in loss of Rs.651.54 crores, the applicant had shown it to be in profits of Rs.8.47 crores. The re-audit disclosed that a sum of Rs.50 crores was illegally advanced by the bank to M/s. Sky Lab Builders. The Bank’s Chief Executive Officer had entered into transactions amounting to Rs.25 crores without prior permission of the board of Directors. Loan of Rs.511.54 crores was disbursed by crossing limits and without verifying the credibility of the debtors. The government securities were also encashed in breach of the * 3 * ABA.513.2011 6.7.2011 guidelines issued by RBI which resulted into loss of Rs.12.18 crores by way of penalty imposed. Thus, the total amount in respect of the criminal misappropriation comes to Rs.598.72 crores. This has brought the bank into serious financial crisis, prejudicially affecting all the account holders who had reposed trust in the bank by depositing their money with it. Thus, the misappropriation is of public funds. Apart from the allegations relating to the manner in which the applicant had audited the accounts of the bank, it has been specifically alleged in the complaint that the applicant had taken loan of Rs.20,00,000/- from the bank and before repaying the entire loan, his loan account has been closed. 3. Mr. Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the applicant had done the work of auditing the accounts of the bank on the basis of the documents that were made available to him by the bank. He refers to the FIR to submit that it is the prosecution’s case that the banks computer system was defective. According to him, the defects in the computer system also must have affected the work of the applicant. He submits that the entire case of the prosecution is based upon the documents which are already available to the prosecution and there is nothing to be recovered from the applicant. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary and hence, the applicant * 4 * ABA.513.2011 6.7.2011 be released on anticipatory bail. 4. Perusal of the FIR shows that there are serious allegations made against the applicant as regards his functioning as an auditor and also in the matter of taking loan from the bank and not repaying it and getting the account closed even before the repayment of the loan. In view of he serious allegations made which affect the general public, in my opinion, the investigating agency must have a complete opportunity to investigate into the complaint. The audit report is infact supposed to be mirror of the functioning of the bank. Instead, the applicant had shown a false image of the bank in his audit reports. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my extra-ordinary powers of grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the application is dismissed. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]