(1) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3502 of 2011 (In Criminal Application No. 1565 of 2011) 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Superintendent of Police, .. Applicants Parbhani. (Original respondents) versus Sandhya Sunil Kuber, Age : 34 years, Occupation : Housewife, R/o. 8-9, 300 Quarters Building, .. Respondent SRPF, Jalna. (Original applicant) ....................... Smt. R.K. Ladda, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the applicants. Mr. R.P. Mote, Advocate, for the respondent (Absent). ........................ (2) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 3RD OCTOBER 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned APP Smt. R.K. Ladda, for the applicant / State, finally. 2. It appears from the record, that the learned Adv. Mr. R.P. Mote, for the respondent, was present on the last date i.e. 22nd September 2011, and accepted notice for the respondent, and sought time to take instructions, and accordingly, matter was adjourned for today i.e. 3rd October 2011. However, the respondent, as well as, her Advocate, Mr. R.P. Mote, are absent today. 3. The applicant / State has preferred the present Application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the respondent / accused by order passed by this Court in Criminal Application No. 1565/2011, on 27th April 2011. 4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that number of unemployed youths were allured allegedly by the husband of the respondent, namely, Sunil Kuber, in a network to provide (3) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 employment, and in that exercise, substantial amount ranging from Rs. 3,70,000/- to Rs. 5,00,000/- individually was collected. The figure of the said collection of the amount went up to Rs. 60,00,000/-. The network was allegedly coordinated by the husband of the present respondent with others. There are allegations against the present respondent also, that she stated the complainant that he would get job as her husband is on higher post. However, it is alleged that the said unemployed youths were cheated and defrauded by the present respondent, her husband and other co-accused persons. Hence, complaint was filed by the first complainant, namely, Sham s/o. Parmeshwar Rasne, against the respondent and other co-accused persons, and Crime No. 42/2011 was registered against them at Police Station Pathri (District : Parbhani). 5. After registration of the said crime against the respondent, she filed application for anticipatory bail i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 154/2011, before learned Sessions Judge, Parbhani, but the same was rejected on 28-3-2011. Hence, the respondent preferred Criminal Application No. 1565/2011 for anticipatory bail before this Court. After hearing the parties, this Court granted anticipatory bail to the respondent herein, on 27-4-2011, on certain conditions, such as, (i) the respondent was directed to give (4) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 attendance before the concerned investigator on every Thursday and Sunday between 3.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. till 31st May 2011; (ii) respondent was also directed to deposit sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- within two weeks, with learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Pathri, and copy of the said order is produced at Exhibit "A" of the present Application. 6. However, it is the grievance of the applicant / State, that the respondent has committed breach of the aforesaid conditions imposed upon the respondent while granting anticipatory bail on 27th April 2011, as aforesaid, and it is submitted that the respondent has not given attendance before the concerned investigator on every Thursday and Sunday between 3.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m., till 31st May 2011. It is also submitted that the respondent has not deposited sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-, within a period of two weeks, with Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Pathri. Hence, the applicant / State has urged to cancel the conditional anticipatory bail granted to the respondent, since the conditions thereof are not fulfilled. 7. Learned APP submitted on the basis of the report dated 2nd October 2011, received from the concerned Police Station, that the respondent has not complied with the conditions imposed upon her while granting anticipatory bail by order dated (5) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 27th April 2011, and neither she has given attendance, as directed, nor she has deposited amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- within a period of two weeks, as directed in the order dated 27th April 2011. It is also reported that the respondent has not preferred any application for extension of time to deposit the aforesaid amount. 8. In the circumstances, it is apparent that the order passed by this Court, in Criminal Application No. 1565/2011, on 27th April 2011, granting anticipatory bail to the respondent was the conditional order and the respondent was directed to give attendance before the concerned investigator on every Thursday and Sunday between 3.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m., till 31st May 2011, as well as, the respondent was directed to deposit Rs. 5,00,000/- with learned J.M.F.C., Pathri, within a period of two weeks. However, as per contention of the applicant / State, and as per submission made by the learned APP, on instructions received from the report dated 2nd October 2011, that the respondent has not complied with both the conditions, and since the respondent has not given attendance as per stipulation, as aforesaid, as well as, since the respondent has not deposited the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- within a period of two weeks with the learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Pathri, as stated by learned APP, on instructions, as per the report dated 2nd October 2011, anticipatory bail granted to the respondent by order dated 27th (6) Cri. Application No. 3502 of 2011 April 2011 deserves to be cancelled forthwith, by allowing the present Application. 9. In the result, present Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" thereof, and anticipatory bail granted to the respondent / accused, by order passed in Criminal Application No. 1565/2011, dated 27th April 2011, by this Court, stands cancelled forthwith, due to non-compliance of the conditions imposed upon the respondent in the said order, and the present Criminal Application is disposed of finally. Office to inform the concerned Police Station accordingly. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/3502ka