IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.352 OF 2009 Rajiv Manohar Karambelkar ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri M.S. Mohite i/b. Shri Tushar Sonawane for Applicant Shri Rajesh More, APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 10TH FEBRUARY, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the learned APP for State. 2. The only allegation against the Applicant herein in a complaint filed by the auditor of the bank that he had obtained a loan of Rs.35,00,000/- and the said amount was not repaid and there was a default committed by the Applicant in repayment of the said loan. In the complaint, it is alleged that the director of the bank had given the loan to his relatives and friends. 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that the bank, in this case, had taken demand promissory note, hypothecation agreement, deed of guarantee and he had supplied profit and loss accounts, balance sheets in the name of Rajmohan Builder. He submitted that certificate has been issued against him under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. It is submitted that the Applicant was not a relative of any of the directors of the bank and he had taken a genuine loan for his business purposes. He submitted that the Applicant owns three galas and the market value of the said galas is a tune of Rs.10 to 12 lacs each. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant has given an undertaking to this Court that he shall not dispose of or create any third party rights in respect of the said galas during pendency of the recovery proceeding initiated by the bank under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. 4. In view of this, prima facie case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. Merely because there is a default in repayment of loan, a borrower cannot be held to be liable for the offence punishable under section 420 or 406, 408 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. The bank can, under these circumstances, sue recovery proceeding against him. In the present case, a certificate has already been granted in favour of the bank under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The custodial interrogation, therefore, of the Applicant, in my view, is not necessary. 6. The Applicant, therefore, in the event of his arrest in connection with an offence punishable under sections 403, 406, 408, 409, 418, 420, 468, 471, 120(B) r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal code vide FIR No.152 of 2006 registered at Panchvati Police Station, shall be released on bail in a sum of Rs.35,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicant shall report to the concerned police station for a period of three days from 16th February, 2009 between 11 a.m. & 2 p.m. and, thereafter, as and when called. The Applicant shall co-operate with the police in the investigation of the case. 7. Application is, accordingly, allowed in the aforesaid terms and is disposed of. V.M. KANADE J.