1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. APPLICATION NO. 531 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3963 OF 2009 Govind Basilal Biyani ........Applicant versus State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. And The Shamrao Vithal Co­operative Bank Ltd....Intervener Mr. Shashank Borade adv. for original applicant. Mr. J.P. Kharge APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. A.S. Daver a/w Nikil Rajani i/b V. Deshpande & co. for the intervener. CORAM: A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 26th March, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the intervener, so also learned counsel for accused and learned APP for State. 2. The intervener is a Co­operative bank and it seeks clarification touching clause (c) of the operative part of the order dated 25­9­2009 where under condition is imposed while granting bail to the accused. Clause (c) directs the applicants (accused) in the bail application that they shall individually file an undertaking with the investigating officer within a period of one week from the date of their release from the custody that they/he shall not sale, mortgage, encumber or charge any property of the M/s. Bansi Pulp and Papers Mill Pvt. Ltd. and their private property hereafter 2 without prior permission of the court. 3. According to the intervener much prior to the passing of the order dated 25­9­2009 certain immovable properties were mortgaged by the accused which belong to M/s. Bansi Pulp and Papers Mill Pvt. Ltd. so also their private properties. Hence the bank had proceeded under the provisions of Securitisation Act against the secured assets. The grievance of the intervener is that the accused are causing obstruction in the way of the intervener bank by representing people at large that on account of the order passed by this court dated 25­9­2009 the property cannot be put to sale. Symbolic possession is already taken by the bank under section 13 of the Securitisation Act, as is claimed by the learned counsel on behalf of the intervener. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the accused so also the State has no objection to clarify the order dated 25­9­2009 to the effect that the said order in no way causes any impediment or obstruction in the way of the intervener bank from proceeding against the secured assets under Securitisation Act. In that view of he matter, it is clarified that the order dated 25­9­2009 does not cause any impediment or obstruction to the present intervener bank in proceeding against the secured assets of M/s. Bansi Pulp and Papers Mill Pvt. Ltd. so also the mortgaged property of the accused by having recourse to the provisions of Securitisation Act. The application is thus disposed of, with the above clarification. (A.P.DESHPANDE, J.) 3