IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 708 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 708 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 708 OF 2008 Chandrashekhar Panchayya Swami. ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. A.P.Mundargi, senior counsel with V.V.Purwant for the applicant. J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 21st April 2008. DATED: 21st April 2008. DATED: 21st April 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. After having suffered adverse order dated 14th November, 2007 at the hands of the Sessions Judge, Pandharpur, the applicant has move this application under section 439 of Cr.P.C., to seek bail in connection with C.R. No.72/2007 registered with Mangalwedha Police Station, Solapur for the offences punishable under sections 406, 408, 420, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471(a), 217, 218, 166, 167, 120(B) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 3. The applicant was appointed as Awal Clerk in Tahasildar’s office at Mangalwedha. He was involved in issuance of some cheques which are subject matter of this criminal prosecution; wherein fraudulent encashment of cheques and misappropriation are alleged. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet is already filed. 4. In the above view of the matter, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is already in custody since 4th May, 2007. That trial will take its own time but since investigation is complete the custody of the applicant is not necessary. 5. Per contra, learned A.P.P. submits that certain clarifications with respect to the documents seized and the transactions entered into are required to be obtained from the applicant and, therefore, his custody is relevant. He, however, alternatively, submitted that if the bail is to be granted, then the applicant be directed to attend the police station once in every 15 days till further order and also as and when required. 6. In the above view of the matter, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant, subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant, arrested in connection with C.R.No.72/2007 registered with Mangalwedha Police Station, Solapur shall be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two local sureties to make up the said amount. (b) The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station once in 15 days, on Saturday between 3.00 to 5.00 p.m. and as and when called till conclusion of the trial. He shall co-operate with the investigating agency for disposal of the case. (c) The order of bail will be given effect only after the applicant furnishes to the investigating officer the details about his place of residence and address where he proposes to stay after he is enlarged on bail. The applicant will not change his residential address thereafter till the conclusion of trial without prior intimation to the investigating officer. (d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat or pressurise any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (e) It is needless to mention that breach of any of the conditions by the applicant shall result in cancellation of bail. (f) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as finding or expression on merits of the case at the time of trial. 7. Application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE