1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRI.APPLICATION NO.4183 OF 2008 (RAVINDRA VASANTRAO YEOLE...Vs.. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Shri Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for Applicant. Shri K.S.Dhote, A.P.P. for Respondent/ State. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : DECEMBER 16, 2008. 1. This is an application for bail by a Treasury Officer, who has been involved in multi-crore fraud, whereby bills were passed for goods never intended to be received by the Health Department in Amravati District. The applicant had been taken in custody and since 15.11.2008 he is in magisterial custody. The learned counsel for the applicant states that co-accused in the case, who have also similarly approved the bills have been bailed out. 2. I have perused reply filed on behalf of the respondent and I have also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 3. Magnitude of the fraud is undoubtedly relevant consideration but cannot be the only consideration to decide whether the applicant ought to be in jail or on bail. If 2 applicant's presence in custody is not required for the purpose of investigation and his presence at the trial can be secured as also it can be secured that ill-gotten wealth, if any, with the applicant can be made available for appropriation at the end of trial, then bail need not be denied to the applicant. Since the applicant is in magisterial custody it is not clear as to how his presence in the custody would further the cause of investigation. 4. In view of this, following order is passed. The applicant be released on his furnishing P.R.B. in Rs.One Lac with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.One Lac on the following conditions : a) The applicant shall furnish list of his assets, which the State shall tally with the return of his properties, which must have been filed ; b) The applicant shall file an undertaking that he shall not transfer any of these assets till trial is over, without leave of the trial Court ; c) The applicant shall furnish information in respect of his bank accounts and shall keep on informing the Investigating Officer or Prosecutor, incharge of the 3 case, of the transaction he undertakes from these bank accounts, so that such need arise the Prosecutor or Investigating Officer could apply to the trial Court to have the accounts seized. 5. The entire property of the applicant would be liable to be dealt with as the property in the case at the end of the trial. 6. The application is disposed of accordingly. 7. Hamdast granted. JUDGE RR.