{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2010 Savita w/o Ashok Nagargoje & Another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.U.B.Bondar, Advocate for applicants Mr.B.J.Sonawane, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 7th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.224/2009 registered with Kadim Jalna Police Station for an offence punishable u/s 402, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation, carried out till today. {2} 3. It appears that the offence came to be registered on the complaint lodged by one Vijay Rathod alleging that the present applicants run an educational institution and had published an advertisement for recruitment of certain posts and cost of the form for the same was kept at Rs.200/-. Thereafter, the candidates, who had applied in pursuance of the said advertisement, were interviewed and about 312 candidates came to be selected. It is further alleged that for the said appointments, cash ranging between Rs.25,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- was collected from the selected candidates. It is alleged that after selection none of the candidate, who are selected, are paid by the applicants. List of the persons, who have given money to the applicants, is enclosed with the complaint. 4. It is urged by the learned counsel for the applicants that from the contents of the advertisement, it is clear that the said posts were temporary and not permanent in nature. It is also contended that the said post were to be filled in on honorarium basis not on salary basis. It is tried to urge that the action of the applicants cannot be termed or constitute an offence of cheating, as alleged. Therefore, it is prayed to release the applicants on anticipatory bail. 5. The application is opposed by the learned APP on the ground that there is prima facie case against the present applicants. {3} 6. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the papers of investigation, it is clear that the candidates, whose names are annexed with the complaint, have applied for the post advertised by the applicants. Some appointment orders are on record. Bare perusal of the advertisement as well as appointment orders clearly indicate that the said appointments were not given in the institutes run by the applicants, but the same were given in the Zilla Parishad Circle. It is surprising to note that though the applicants are in no way associated or connected with the Zilla Parishad, yet they have published the advertisement and appointed the persons, which itself goes to show prima facie involvement of the applicants in the offence of cheating. In the premise, no case is made out to release the applicants on anticipatory bail. 7. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln9-10