1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 520 of 2008 Date of decision:24/9/2009 For approval and signature HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.U.CHANDIWAL 1. Whether the Reporters of Local Papers Yes/ may be allowed to see the Judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see /No. the fair copy of the Judgment ? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial? No. question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950, or any order made thereunder ? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the No. Civil Judges ? 6. Whether the case involves an important No question of law and whether a copy of the Order should be sent to Bombay, Goa and Nagpur Office ? (A.G. PARALIKAR) Private Secretary agp/office/520-08crapl 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.520 of 2008 1. Rajendra s/o Bhanudas Dandwate, Age 42 years, occ: agri., 2. Ashok s/o Rambhau Bawake, Age 48 years, Occ: Agri., 3. Shrikrishna s/o Venunath Dandwate, Age: 69 years, Occ: Agri., 4. Parashram s/o Bhagwanrao Mate, Age: 32 years, Occ: Agri. 5. Shantaram s/o Balasaheb Gangad, Age 41 years, Occ: Agri., All r/o Sakuri, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. 6. Raosaheb s/o Tukaram Laware, Age: 53 years, Occ: Agri., 7. Chandrabhan s/o Sitaram Mujmule, age 36 years, Occ: Agri., r/o Khadewaki, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. 8. Vijay s/o Baburao Khandagale, Age: 43 years, Occ: Agri., 9. Tatyaram s/o Balaji Bansode, Age: 55 years, Occ: Agri., 10. Dhondiba s/o Namdeo Dabhade, Age: 48 years, Occ: Agri., 3 11. Dnyaneshwar s/o Ramnath Bawake, Age: 40 years, Occ: Agri. 12. Sau.Anita Nandu Shirole, Age: 48 years, Occ: Household. All r/o Sakuri, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANTS (Orig.accused/petitioners) VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Police Inspector, Police Station, Rahata, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. ...RESPONDENTS (No.2 Ori.complainant) ... Mr. R.N.Dhorde, Adv., h/f Mr. R.L.Kute, Adv., for the applicants. Mr. K.M.Suryawanshi, A.P.P., for respondent State. Mr. C.A.Jadhav, Adv., h/f Mr. V.D.Hon, Adv., for intervenor, to assist A.P.P. ... CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 24/9/2009 *** ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard both the Counsel and learned A.P.P. extensively. Rule. With the consent of Counsel for respective parties, heard forthwith. 2. FIR filed vide No.I-8/2008, registered 4 at Rahata Police Station, tq. Rahata, dist. Ahmednagar, at the instance of auditor Mr. P.V.Gaikwas is questioned by the applicants herein. 3. Counsel for the applicants submit, the entire FIR revealed that it is activated with political mala fides and in order to corner the applicants herein with coordination from mentor, the auditor has prepared false report. He did not wait though there was a stay in Revision Application No.103/2007, which was pending before Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nashik Division, Nashik, dt.25.1.2008 ( lodged on 5.11.2007) and filed the FIR on 29th Jan.,2008, to repeat, despite there being a stay. 4. The Counsel submits, the events chronologically at all the levels, the matter is subjected before this Court by several petitions when the stay was not entertained by the revisional Court. Writ Petition No.7222/2007 was moved by the present applicant. Another Writ Petition being Writ Petition No.2661/2008 was moved against which again L.P.A.being No. 115/2008 is moved before this Court and by order dt.22nd July, 2008, L.P.A. is admitted. 5. Though the credit society is meant as a harbinger to uplift the needy borrowers, 5 particularly, the agriculturists, it is obvious it has been used as a battle field to settle individual political scores. 6. For this Court the limited avenue is whether the action in terms of FIR No.I-08/2008 is justified or the allegations taken together will make out a case against the present applicants. 7. Learned A.P.P., during the course of his submissions, quoted certain instances as to showing that there was purported loan application of Sanjay Shelke dt.6th Feb.,2006, however, the bond for the same is shown to have been purchased on 25th Nov.,2005. In a meeting dt.6th Feb., 2006, inspite of there being no sufficient funds with the credit society, five loans were sanctioned without any signature or application from the respective borrowers. The loans were allegedly disbursed in cash against the Rules of the society, which contemplate that it should be by cheque. The disposal of the loan is tried to be shown as conversion in the fixed deposits making a show that it was not availed. The loan disbursed for purchase of cow is again a fabrication as no cows were purchased or no permits were any time secured. 8. At this stage of the matter, without 6 adverting to the events in deep discussed by the learned Counsel, giving reference to page No.135 of his compilation, the fact remains, the recital in the FIR cannot prima facie indicate to be a falsehood or that it is giving a smelling of any abuse of powers by the learned Auditor, respondent no.3, Mr.P.V.Gaikwad. The truth of the allegations will be revealed as it was the test audit report dt.1.4.2005 to 31.3.2007 which was tested because the revisional authorities found irregularities and illegalities noticed by Mr.P.V.Gaikwad to be in existence and, consequently, revisional authority rejected the same by order dt.3rd March, 2008. In the above set of facts, there is no merit. Criminal Application No.520/2008, is dismissed. Rule discharged. I find investigation is completed. Chargesheet is filed. The interim protection extended upto 6th Nov.,2009. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/520-08crapl