1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4318 OF 2010 Mr.Benedict William S/o. Pakayaswamy Villiam, Age-40 years, Occu-Service, R/o.1-1-298/201, Ankul Apartments, Ashoknagar, Hyderabad (A.P.) APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through its Incharge-Officer, Police Station, Shrirampur, Tal.Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar RESPONDENT Mr.P.R.Katneshwarkar, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for respondent State. Mr.G.K.Thigale Patil, learned counsel for original complainant. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 29/10/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.192/2010, registered in Shrirampur Police Station of Dist. Ahmednagar. 2. On 21/10/2010, interim protection was granted to the 2 applicant. 3. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned APP for State and learned counsel for original complainant. 4. This CR is the offshoot of the order passed u/s. 156(3) of The Cr.P.C. In RTC No.201/10 lodged before the J.M.F.C. Shrirampur by the Assist. Manager (Legal) of M/s.Tilaknagar Industries Ltd.,, having site office at Shrirampur and the head office at Church Gate, Mumbai. 5. Such of the facts as are necessary for the decision of this application, are as follows : Applicant herein came to be appointed as Vice-President in Sales and Marketing Wing vide order dated 28/08/2006 on the monthly salary in the sum of Rs.83,333/-. Thereafter, his salary was increased considering his performance,to the tune of Rs.1,66,667/- p.m. w.e.f. 20/05/2007. Thereafter, somewhere in November 2008, the said salary further increased to the tune of Rs.8,33,334/- p.m. The employer Industries suspects that some foul play is played at the hands of applicant, hence services of the applicant came to be terminated w.e.f. 10/08/2009. It is alleged that during the period of 01/11/2007 to 27/07/2009, the applicant herein has mis-appropriated funds of the company worth Rs.41,71,365/-. Special civil suit came to be filed against the applicant bearing No.56/2009 in the Court of Civil Judge, S.D. Shrirampur, which is still pending. It appears that this private 3 complaint was lodged on 17/04/2010. 6. With the assistance of respective counsels for the parties, I have gone through the text of the complaint. The crux of the matter i.e. Allegations against the applicant are find place in para no.10 and 11. It is mentioned in para no.11 that the applicant had claimed false claim of Rs.7,63,495/- without submitting the proof of the expenses, which under bonafide belief company has granted. It is further alleged in para no.11 that somewhere in the year 2009, the applicant herein had claimed amount in the sum of Rs.60,12,600/- under the head of sending 122 persons for Dubai Trip, wherein in fact only 42 members were sentton the Dubai Trip and particulars of remaining 80 persons were not submitted, and thus there is false claim of the applicant in the recovery of the said amount. It is alleged that with the help of Vijaya Travels and Services, the excess amount of Rs.24,93,050/- is claimed by the applicant. 7. To constitute an offence punishable u/s. 406, and 420 of The IPC, the basic requirement is to constitute an offence for the criminal breach of trust, is that the property to be entrusted to the person who is arrayed as an accused for some specific purpose. Then it is to be averred that their property, which is entrusted is utilized for the purpose other than the purpose for which it is entrusted and the most important aspect is that, this property require to be used by the concerned for his own use than the purpose for which the property is entrusted. To constitute an offence u/s. 420 of The IPC, there shall 4 be a basic principle that to induce the person to part with the property and there shall be a wrongful gain to the person, to whom the property is handed over under that false promise and there must be a wrongful loss to the person, who has complained under the inducement he has parted with the property. On clear reading of para no.10 & 11, these basic ingredients of the offences found missing. Considering this aspect, it appears that the entire complaint is based on the documents, which are in the custody of the complainant and not in the custody of this applicant. If the case is based on documents, no custodial interrogation of applicant is necessary. In the premise, application is allowed. Interim protection granted, is hereby extended till filing of the charge sheet. In the meantime, the applicant to attend Shrirampur Police Station, on every Monday in between 11.00 a.m. To 2.00 p.m. It is made clear that violation of this condition will automatically cancel the order today passed. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/OCT. 2010/cri.appl.4318-10