(1) CRI. APPLN. 317.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 317 OF 2010 Suman Supadu Pachpande, Age : 73 years, Occu.: Household, R/o : Savada, Tq. Raver, Dist. Jalgaon .. Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra (Copy served on the Public Prosecutor, High Court Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondent Mr. Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for the applicant Smt. V.A. More, APP. for the Respondent-State ... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 10TH MARCH, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1] This is the second Application of the Applicant, seeking anticipatory bail in Crime no. 1 of 2008 of Savada Police Station, Jalgaon. The applicant was the Ex-Chair person of a co-operative Society at Savada. The Society's audit inspection for the financial year 2005-2006, was carried out and it was noticed that the society had committed large number of irregularities and that there were many instances of misappropriation of funds. It was noticed that an amount of Rs.2,92,00,000/- was (2) CRI. APPLN. 317.2010 invested in other co-operative societies in violation of the Reserve Bank of India's norms. This report showed that large amounts belonging to the applicant's co-operative society were siphoned off. A complaint came to be lodged on 5.1.2008 against the present applicant, other directors of the society and the Manager. All other accused were either arrested or have obtained anticipatory bail. The Police by now have completed investigation and have filed chargesheet against the accused including the applicant, showing her as absconding. 2] On 11.11.2008, I heard her application and rejected it mainly on the ground that in a case of this nature, investigation with custodial interrogation of the applicant was necessary. After my earlier order, practically nothing happened qua the applicant; she was not arrested. Since my last order, almost 16 months have passed. The applicant filed an affidavit in support of her Application stating therein that on 11.1.2010 at about 11.00 am, she and her son went to see the Investigation Officer at the Police Station. She said she wanted to offer her specimen signature and handwriting to the Investigation Officer for the purpose of investigation. She said she also expressed her willingness to answer the queries pertaining to the case etc. She said the Investigation Officer A.P.I. Nilesh Mainkar refused to obtain her signatures etc. (3) CRI. APPLN. 317.2010 and said that the matter was pending before the Sessions Court. As against these allegations, I asked the Investigation Officer to offer his comments. He filed an affidavit in which he stated thus:- . "On 11.01.2010 Suman Supadu Pachpade did not come alongwith her son Vijay Supadu Pachpande in connection with crime no. 1 of 2008 which is lodged in Savada Police Station. So question does not arise to obtain specimen signature of Suman Supadu Pachpande". . This statement really does not make much sense. The Police Officer does not say as to whether he was at the Police Station on that day and at that time. The Police Officer even did not say that despite of efforts, he could not arrest the applicant and she remained absconding since last 16 months or so. Even though it is assumed that the Police Officer is suggesting to the Court that he could not arrest the applicant after her Application was rejected on 11.11.2008, I am inclined to dis- believe it. The applicant who is 72 years old could not be a difficult fugitive. 3] Smt. More, learned APP. brought to my notice the contents of the earlier affidavit in which it was stated that when daughter of the applicant died, the applicant did not come to attend the funeral and thereby suggested that the applicant remained (4) CRI. APPLN. 317.2010 absconding and beyond the reach of the law. I am afraid this incident can-not be given importance, because at the funeral the Police certainly expected the applicant to come but that was not the only opportunity for the Police to apprehend the applicant. I firmly believe that the Police, especially the Investigation Officer does not really want to arrest the applicant. So, I presume further that he does not want to oppose the Application for bail. The Application, should therefore succeed. 4] In the event of the applicant's arrest in this case, she shall be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with one surety in the like amount. However, the applicant shall give her specimen signature and handwriting to the Investigation Officer and answer his queries in connection with the case. For this purpose, she shall attend the Police Station as and when required by the Investigation Officer, in writing. 5] Criminal Application stands disposed of. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp