[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.3060 OF 2008 Devendra Vasant Nemade ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Sudatta J.Patil Advocate for Applicant Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 04, 2008 DATE : SEPTEMBER 04, 2008 DATE : SEPTEMBER 04, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in CR No.I-87 of 2008 of Badlapur Police Station, Dist. Thane. The said case is mainly under Sections 420 and 406 r.w. 34 of IPC. 3. The applicant was a Director of Co-operative Credit Society. The prosecution case is that there was misappropriation and criminal breach of trust committed by the applicant, directors and other officers of the credit Society to the tune of Rs.26 [-2-] lakhs. The material on record shows that when the meeting of the society was called, at that time, the applicant proposed Resolution No.11 about returning of amounts of Rs.50,000/- to seven persons. Rs.50,000/- each was returned to Rajendra Patil, Jagdish Patil and Kaushalya Patil and Rs.50,000/- each were distributed to Dhanraj Teli, Sudhir Mahajan, Ganesh Zope and Sushil Patil. In the said resolution, the applicant has proposed that the money may be given to these seven persons. However, during the enquiry, it was found that Sudhir Mahajan and Ganesh Zope are not members of the society and both these persons have stated that they have not received the said amount. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that co-accused Sushil Patil, Arun Razake and Sanjeev Bagul have been released on anticipatory bail. However, on perusal of the material, it is seen that there is no case of parity. The applicant is the main person who had proposed that money should be given to the said seven persons. There are specific allegations in the FIR against the applicant. [-3-] 5. The learned advocate for the applicant has placed reliance on one letter dated 27.2.2008 written by the applicant and other persons to the Joint Registrar (Co-Operative) regarding misappropriation of Rs.3,50,000/-. Such a letter may have been addressed by the applicant and others to the Joint Registrar, however, the FIR and other material in the present case clearly shows the involvement of the applicant. It shows that he is the main person who proposed that amounts should be distributed to various persons. Though the record of the credit society shows that the amount was given to these persons, the fact remains that many of these persons had not received the said amount. Looking to the material on record, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Application is rejected. Applicant is granted time to surrender till 6.9.2008. 6. Application is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]