1 sns IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.659 OF 2011 1 Dr. Sunanda Baburao Patil 2 Smt. Usha Dinkar Patil ...Applicants. v/s The State ...Respondent. Mr. A.P.Mundargi i/by K.S.Patil, advs. For the Applicants. Ms S.V.Sonawane, APP For the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA,J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 7,2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 As per the directions given on 16th August, 2011, the learned APP has taken instructions from the I.O., who is also present before the Court. According to him, there are about 400 depositors and who, being either widows or destitutes were entitled to receive an amount of Rs.10,000/­ each from the funds provided by the Government as the depositors could not get their money from the society due to financial difficulties, which the society was facing. According to the prosecution, during the investigation during the last 2­3 months, five complaints have been received. Out of them two 2 persons had died long before but still amounts were shown to have been deposited in their accounts and also withdrawn. There are other three complainants, according to whom, they had never any account with the society and still the society had received amounts from the Government in their names. According to the prosecution, there may be some more cases where some misappropriation or mischief has been committed. In view of the fact that out of about 400 depositors, only five complaints have been received, possibility of very huge misappropriation does not appear to be there. 3 After perusal of the record, it appears that the society had gone into the financial trouble because of the low recovery from the depositors. The society has also initiated action for the recovery of the amount by obtaining recovery certificate under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co­operative Societies Act or by filing disputes before the different Co­operative Courts. Taking into consideration the nature of the case and the statement made today as well as on 16.8.2011, I find 3 that custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary but to secure the interest of some of the depositors or to secure interest of the State in respect of fake persons in whose names amounts might have been taken by the society, applicants may be directed to deposit certain amounts as security. Applicant no.1 is the chairperson and practising doctor while the applicant no.2 is an employee of the society and working as secretary. 4 Therefore, subject to the applicant no.1 depositing amount of Rs.5 lac with the trial Court within two weeks from this date, the anticipatory bail is granted to the both the applicants in terms of the order dated 16th August, 2011. 5 Application stands disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)