( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4606 OF 2010 1. Kondiram s/o Babaji Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. 2. Sow. Kusumbai w/o Kondiram Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. 3. Balasaheb s/o Kondiram Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. 4. Padmakar s/o Bajirao Arsul, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate for the applicants. Mr. D.V. Tele, APP for the respondent/State. .... WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4519 OF 2010 Dattatraya s/o Baburao Dhas, R/o Talnewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another RESPONDENTS .... Mr. V.D. Hon, advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.V. Tele, APP for the respondents/State. .... ( 2 ) WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4647 OF 2010 1. Kondiram s/o Babaji Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. 2. Sow. Kusumbai w/o Kondiram Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. 3. Balasaheb s/o Kondiram Dhavale, R/o Talanewadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed. APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate for the applicants. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 22nd November, 2010] PER COURT : 1. These are applications for anticipatory bail. 2. Heard learned advocate for the applicants and learned A.P.P. 3. The FIR purports to show that applicant Kondiram Babaji Dhavle is ex-employee of the Beed District Central ( 3 ) Cooperative Bank. He was working as Senior Accountant of Georai Branch till 2007. It is alleged that during the course of his employment, applicant Kondiram Dhavle committed theft of certain documents, including stationary of the Bank and prepared bogus credit advices and demand draft. It is alleged that he deposited the bogus credit advices and demand draft in the accounts of himself and his family members and relatives. He got withdrawn several amounts from such accounts standing in his name and in the names of his relatives and others by utilizing his good office. It is alleged that in all, amount of Rs. 45,21,941/- was misappropriated from the Branch of Jaibhavani Sugar Factory at Gadhi and an amount of Rs. 27,71,076/- was misappropriated from Umapur Branch of the Bank. 4. Upon hearing learned advocates for the applicants, learned A.P.P. and on perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that there is prima facie evidence to show that applicant Kondiram Dhavle had access to the Bank's stationary and had necessary knowledge regarding the operation of the Bank accounts. It is argued by the learned advocate for the applicant - Kondiram that the amounts of the cotton vendors' bills were deposited in the account and the withdrawals were ( 4 ) made from such account. Some of the deposit receipts are also placed on record. It appears, no doubt, that some of the amounts were deposited in the name of son and wife of applicant Kondiram. As against this, the affidavit filed by applicant Dattatraya Dhas purports to show that he had not withdrawn any amount from the account opened in his name. He asserted that he had given signatures on the withdrawal slips as per the instructions of applicant Kondiram and the account was being operated by applicant Kondiram though he was named lender of the said account. Not only that, but applicant Dattatraya has placed on record copy of the agreement (Exh-D) purportedly executed by applicant Kondiram Dhavle whereby the latter undertook to clear all the amount and accepted the responsibility. True, such an agreement may not be of much avail so as to completely exonerate applicant Dattatraya Dhas. Even so, the Investigating Officer may consider the agreement and the affidavit of Dattatraya Dhas in order to examine whether Dattatraya Dhas can be an approver witness. 5. There appears prima facie material to infer that applicant Kondiram Dhavle was dealing in business of cotton and his son i.e. applicant No. 3 Balasaheb was also dealing in the business. It appears from copy of the application dated ( 5 ) 2nd September, 2010 submitted by applicant Kondiram Dhavle to the C.E.O. of the Cooperative Bank that he used to withdraw the amounts from the Bank as per the advices and he came to know about the error committed by himself and the son. He alleged that his son and he himself had withdrawn the amounts from the Bank accounts. He also indicated the willingness to deposit the amount so withdrawn. His confessional application may not be taken into account at this juncture, since the verification about his intention to submit such application is yet to be made. 6. Though the applicants alleged that the amounts were deposited from time to time, yet, prima facie it appears that applicant Kondiram used to deal in business of cotton and used to deposit such amount in the context of his business. So also, his son was dealing in the business and used to deposit the amounts. What appears prima facie is that they also fabricated certain Bank advices to get excessive amounts shown as credited in their accounts and thereafter, withdrew the amounts, may be for running of the business. It transpires, therefore, that the applicant - Kondiram was operating some Bank accounts standing in the name of his wife and the son-in- law as well as applicant Dattatraya Dhas. The entire ( 6 ) investigation prima facie shows involvement of the applicant Kondiram and applicant Balasaheb in the dubious transaction which entailed huge misappropriation of the amounts of the Cooperative Bank. 7. Considering the foregoing reasons, the criminal application filed by applicant Kondiram Babaji Dhavle and others (Cri. Appln. No. 4606/2010), only to the extent of applicant No. 2 Sow. Kusumbai Dhavale and applicant No. 4 Padmakar Arsul, is allowed and they (applicants No. 2 - Sow. Kusumbai and No. 4 - Padmakar) are directed to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest, on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) each, before the Arresting Officer, and on condition that they shall attend the concerned Police Station on each Tuesday and Saturday between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. and shall effectively cooperate with the Investigating Officer by remaining present and for physical interrogation as well as submitting their specimens or handwritings of their signatures, as may be required. They shall attend the concerned Police Station for four (4) weeks on the above days for the purpose of effective investigation. The application of applicant No. 1 Kondiram Babaji Dhavle and applicant No. 3 Balasaheb Kondiram Dhavle ( 7 ) (Cri. Application No. 4606/2010) is, however, dismissed. The application of applicant - Dattatraya Baburao Dhas (Cri. Appln. No. 4519/2010) is allowed. He is directed to be released on bail on the same terms mentioned above in relation to applicant Sow. Kusumbai and applicant - Padmakar. 8. All the three applications are accordingly disposed of. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/criapln4606-4519-4647-10