1 APPLN 4188 OF 2010.sxw vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4188 OF 2010. Vilasrao Narayan Jagtap .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Umesh Mankapure for the Applicant. Mr. Nitin Jamdar, for the respondent No.2 a/w Mr. Vijay Killedar for the original complainant Mrs. R.V. Newton, APP for the respondent State. Mr P.G. Sarda for the intervenor. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 20th September, 2010 P.C. 1. This is an application by a Chairman of Sugar factory, for anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in CR No.78 of 2010, registered at Jat City Police Station, District: Sangli, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 418, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant is supposed to have told the informants that they should sign certain documents in order to facilitate the process of contracts for harvesting of sugarcane. The informants signed documents and ultimately found themselves 2 APPLN 4188 OF 2010.sxw slapped with notice from the Co-Operative Bank, for recovery of huge amount. The bank has even obtained recovery certificates from the Co-operative Court. It is the case of the applicant that these amounts were in fact utilized by the Co-operative Sugar factory itself. The sugar factory got resolutions passed in the meetings of its Board of Directors, held on 27.6.2001 and 23.7.2002 for getting loans sanctioned to persons to whom contract which were to be awarded and to repay these loans, from the amounts which were to be paid to the informant contractors towards work which they were to do. It is specifically case of the informants that on the assurances of the applicant, they themselves and some others have signed these documents. 2. It has been contended that in Co-operative Court on behalf of sugar factory a person who was acting as Managing Director had admitted that the loans were in fact accounted for in the accounts of sugar factory and that since sugar factory had financial difficulties, the loans could not be repaid. Thus, it is the case of the applicant that the applicant has nothing to do personally with the loan taken. The bank had sanctioned loan to the tune of Rs.3.82 crores to the informant and others similarly situated persons. Learned counsel for the applicant states that in order to show applicant’s bonafides, the applicant is ready to deposit Rs.20,00,000/- with the Trial Court and the Trial Court may deal 3 APPLN 4188 OF 2010.sxw with the said amount at the end of the trial as per result of trial. 3. The learned APP as well as learned counsel for informants have strong objection to the applicant being bailed out. It is stated that the entire amount has been siphoned off by the applicant and and other Directors and, therefore, it is necessary to investigate into the matter of money being siphoned off to find out as to where the money has gone. It is doubtful if for the sake of finding out that where the money which is siphoned off has gone, the custodial interrogation of the applicant would be necessary. Police Officers could always find out about the transactions entered into by the applicant, his family members etc. In this case particularly since the sugar factory itself has taken a stand that money had in fact utilized by the sugar factory, it may not be difficult to trace out as to where the money has gone. In view of this and particularly in view of offer of the applicant to deposit Rs. 20,00,000/-, though according to learned counsel, for the informants the liability of applicant is more than Rs.1.30 crores, the application is allowed. In the event of his arrest the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs. 50,000/- on the following conditions: i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required: 4 APPLN 4188 OF 2010.sxw ii) the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. iv) The applicant shall deposit Rs.20,00,000/- as offered by him with the learned Trial Court, within a period of two weeks of this order. The amount so deposited shall be invested in the nationalized bank by the learned Trial Judge and it shall be subject to the final outcome of the case. The amount so deposited is without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised by the applicant. v) If any of these conditions are breached by the applicant, the order shall stand automatically vacated. vi) The applicant shall report at the Police station concerned on 23.9.2010 during 10.00 a.m to 1.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when required by the investigating officer. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)