1 CA4713/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4713 OF 2011 Fulchand @ Babri Rajabhau Munde Applicant V E R S U S The Stae of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents Shri R.N. Dhorde, Advocate, holding for Shri V.R. Dhorde, Advocate for the applicant Shri B.V. Wagh, APP for the respondents / State CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 1st December, 2011 PER COURT : 1. The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with CR No. 50 of 2011, registered with Dindrud Police Station, Taluka Majalgaon, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The F.I.R. in regard to the aforesaid Crime has been filed by the Government Auditor Mr. Kshirsagar. It relates to the affairs of Sindphana Shetimal Vitaran Panan Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Deodahiphal, Taluka Dharur, 2 CA4713/11 District Beed (hereinafter referred to as ‘Sindphana Society’). The F.I.R., no doubt principally relates to embezzlement of funds in the aforesaid Society. As an offshoot of the said F.I.R., it is discovered by the investigating agency that the directors of the Beed District Central Co-operative Bank are concerned in the matter of grant of loan to the Sindhphana Society in terms of lakhs of rupees though such loan could not have been granted. It is noticed that, on account of resolution dated 8th July, 2009, a loan in terms of Lakhs of rupees came to be granted to the Sindhphana Society, and on 10th October, 2009, Mr. Rajabhau Munde and the present applicant approached Parali Branch of the Beed District Central Co-operative Bank and contacted the Branch Manager Mr. Khade, and with the help of the said Branch Manager Mr. Khade, on delivery of bearer cheques drawn in favour of certain persons in terms of lakhs of rupees withdrew in all Rs.1,80,00,000/-. The said withdrawal was done after normal banking hours i. e. at or about 08.00 p.m. 3 CA4713/11 3. The record indicates that the present applicant being son of Mr. Rajabhau Munde, went to the said bank and assisted said Rajabhau Munde in the matter of collecting Rs.1,80,00,000/- in the manner mentioned aforesaid and taking it away. 4. Learned Advocate Mr. R.N. Dhorde appearing for the applicant submitted that even if the word of the witnesses who have rendered statement that the present applicant had accompanied Mr. Rajabhau Munde and that the sum of Rs.1,80,00,000/- came to be withdrawn and that the present applicant alongwith Mr. Rajabhau Munde left said Branch, still the present applicant is not at all concerned with the affairs of the Sindphana Society or Beed District Central Co-operative Bank. He, therefore, submitted that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail. 5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the respondents / State opposed the above submissions and submitted that the present applicant accompanied Mr. Rajabhau Munde and 4 CA4713/11 he was knowing what transpired in the said Branch and he was party to the said withdrawal of Rs.1,80,00,000/- and that is how he is directly involved in the matter of “grant of loan to four societies including Sindphana Society, disbursement of the said amounts covered by the loan sanction, withdrawal of the amounts in cash more than Rs.20,000/- and related matters”. He, therefore, submitted that the application should be rejected. 6. Having heard the learned Advocates of both the sides and perused record, I am of the view that the present applicant cannot get anticipatory bail. Though the role alleged against the present applicant appears to be innocuous, still fact remains that he had participated in the matter of withdrawal of lakhs of rupees in the evening of 10th October, 2011 on the strength of bearer cheques. In fact, the statement of Mr. Jadhav, Cashier, shows that said Rajabhau Munde asked said Jadhav to make the payment and hand over the monies to the present applicant despite said Jadhav had pointed out that the cheques do not bear account number. The said statement 5 CA4713/11 further indicates that the sum of Rs.1,80,00,000/- was handed over to the present applicant. The said monies were dumped in a gunny bag and taken away. In my view, this statement of Mr. Jadhav clearly indicates that the present applicant not only accompanied his father Mr. Rajabhau Munde to the Branch at Parali, but received monies which were withdrawn in violation of Banking rules and regulations. 7. The present applicant participated in the withdrawal of funds, clearly indicates that the present applicant has a definite role to play in the matter of having benefit of funds which came to be embezzled and on that count present applicant’s custodial interrogation is required. In my view, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the application for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. ( R.Y. GANOO, J. ) SRM/1/12/11 6 CA4713/11