1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.555 OF 2010 1. Pramod Dattatraya Kand, Age-53 years, Occu-Business, R/o.11/111, Renavikar Nagar, Savedi, Ahmednagar, 2. Dattatraya Digambar Satpute, Age-35 years, Occu-Driver, R/o.Savedigaon, Nagar-Manmad Road, Ahmednagar. 3. Sanjay Bhagchand Bhore, Age-38 years, Occu-Service, R/o.Sonanagar, Savedi, Ahmednagar 4. Nilesh Mahadu Berad, Age-38 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Mal Galli, Bhingar, Ahmednagar APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar RESPONDENT Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, learned counsel for applicants. Mrs.Y.M.Kshirsagar, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 24/02/2010 2 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.416/2009, registered in Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned APP for State. Also perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that the offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Aslam Karim, working in Raosaheb Patwardhan Patsanstha, Chitale Road, Ahmednagar, alleging that on 23/12/2009, one person Chandrashekhar Mohansing Chandele came in the office of said Patsanstha where he produced one receipt of fix deposit as the date of maturity of the said receipt was on 22/12/2009. As per the recitals in the said FD receipt, amount deposited was Rs.7,00,000/- and after maturity, the amount to repay in the sum of Rs.9,20,500/-. As the person, the complainant suspected about the genuineness of the FD receipt, he made inquiry with the head office and learnt that the receipt produced for encashment was not issued by the head office or any of the branch, hence offence came to be registered against the said Chandrashekhar Chandele. 4. As names of these applicants revealed during the interrogation, they have moved this court for their release on anticipatory bail. 3 5. Prosecution relies on the statement of said Chandrashekhar which was recorded during the interrogation. The entire statement was readover before me, but do not spell out that either of the applicant is author, as a person who prepared the recitals in the said FD receipt as well as the signatories of the said receipt. Even though the statement of accomplice is not admissible, but this is an exception where the statement of accomplice, even though recorded, do not implicate these applicants in the said offence. Case is made out to exercise the discretion u/s. 438 of The Cr.P.C. Hence order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Interim protection granted on 08/02/2010 is hereby confirmed. This order/protection to remain in force till filing of the charge sheet. 3. Applicants to co-operate with the investigation agency. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/FEB 2010/cri-appl-555-10