IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION jmi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2970 OF 2010 Shri Lahu Natha Kanade -- Applicant V/s. 1. Shri Sanjiv R. Chimbulkar 2. The State of Maharashtra -- RESPONDENTS Mr. Ashish Giri i/b. M/s. Jay & Co. for Applicant Mr. S.A. Shaikh, APP for State/ Res.No.2 Mr. Sanjiv R. Chimbulkar, Res.No.1 in person present CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 11th OCTOBER 2011 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. The applicant has been added accused No.1 in C.C. No. 208/M/2001 by the Respondent Sajeev R. Chimbulkar. The propriety of issuance of process dated 17th December, 2008 and 31st July, 2001 were questioned. The matter was taken in Cri. Revision Application No.327 of 2009 by the accused applicant before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Greater Bombay. The learned Judge did not entertain application for discharge, however, directed separation of the two cases namely C.C.No.208/Misc/2000 & C.C./1128/P/2000. 3. The applicant questions issuance of process on the ground that since the police added him as witness in the police complaint, he could not have been added as accused on the behest of Respondent Sanjeev. 4. The available material before the learned Judge indicate that it was at the behest and instance of the accused applicant he being authorised signatory Government funds were withdrawn. The said funds were allegedly tried to be deposited in Sangli Bank and Punjab National Bank and the amount was allegedly misappropriated. In the complaint the respondent No.1 has pointed role of the accused applicant as to how misappropriation taken place. Thus considering these aspects, there being prima facie sufficient material, I do not see any error of the learned Judge rejecting to entertain to discharge by order dated 30th June, 2009 . Application dismissed. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.)