1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.656 OF 2011 Sanjay Shivram Panchal Applicant versus State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.U.L.Shah for applicant. Smt.S.V.Sonawane, APP for the State. CORAM : J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 16th August 2011 PC : 1. The applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.136 of 2011 registered at Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Marg Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, 34 of Indian Penal Code. According to the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the case at the behest of his employer. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant was in service of M/s.Amu Shares and Securities Limited, which is a limited company dealing in share broking. The company had three directors. The complainant Mr.Arvind Shah, Mr.Ashok Chheda and Mr.Manoj Shah are the directors of said company. As per FIR, one Nimit Dhirajlal Patel was working as an Accountant with the company and present applicant was also in service of the company along with seven to eight other staff members. The cheque books of the company used to remain in custody of the Accountant who would, 2 after scrutiny of the relevant documents, prepare the cheques and then one of the directors of the company used to sign the cheques, that too after due scrutiny. In December 2010 Nimit Patel left the job and went abroad. On his place a new accountant Ms.Jaya Devaji Bathia was appointed. When she checked the cheque book she found that two cheques were missing and after enquiry from the bank it was found that one of the cheques was also encashed. Thereafter photostat copies of the cheques were called from the bank and it was revealed that since 2006 Nimit Patel had withdrawn several amounts by using 76 cheques of different dates, all purported to have been signed by the complainant Arvind Shah. It was also revealed that five more cheques shown at sr.nos.77 to 81 in the FIR were signed and got encashed by the accused/applicant in December-2010, January-2011, February-2011, March-2011 and April-2011. Each cheque was of Rs.90,000/-. As per the report, the total amount of Rs. 67,73,000/- was withdrawn from the account of the company by forging the signatures of the complainant. 3. According to the prosecution, during the interrogation by the complainant himself, the accused gave in writing that he had forged the signature of the complainant on the said five cheques shown at sr.nos.77 to 81 of the FIR and that withdrawn the amount of Rs.4.50 lakhs. The learned counsel for the accused-applicant admits the writing and signature on the said statement wherein the applicant has allegedly admitted to have forged the signature of the complainant, but according to him, he was forced to write and sign the said statement, after he was slapped. Amount of Rs.1.10 lakhs was recovered from him. The learned counsel for the applicant points out that the applicant was never appointed as an Accountant. The cheque book was never in his possession. According to him, the cheques were actually signed by the complainant himself. The 3 cheques were bearer cheques and he was deputed to withdraw the amounts from the bank by presentation. On presentation he received the amounts and he handed over the said amounts to Mr.Ashok Chheda, another director of the company, as per instructions given to him. According to him, only the signatures on the back side of the cheques as receiver of the amount are of the applicant, while the signatures as drawer of the cheques are of the complainant himself. He also points out that he was granted ad-interim anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court with liberty to the Police to call him to Police Station at any time for interrogation. But from 28th June 2011 when the ad-interim anticipatory bail was granted, till his application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Trial Court on 6th July 2011, the Police never called him for interrogation or for obtaining his specimen signature for verification. This Court also granted ad-interim anticipatory bail on 8th August 2011 to the application but so far the applicant has not been called by the Police for interrogation. In fact, a comparison of the signatures on the relevant cheques with the signatures of the complainant himself and the specimen signatures of the applicant would be very important for the purpose of investigation. Learned APP informs the Court that the cheques have been collected from the bank. Even though complaint is made about siphoning off huge amount of Rs.67,73,000/-, even as per the allegations in the FIR, the applicant appears to be involved only in five transactions of Rs.4.50 lakhs. Rs.1.10 lakhs have already been recovered from him. Learned advocate for the applicant states that the applicant is willing to deposit Rs.3.40 lakhs to show his bona fides. 4. In view of the facts and circumstances and the nature of the investigation which is required to be undertaken, in my opinion, police custody is not necessary. I, therefore, pass following order :- 4 Subject to the applicant depositing Rs.3.40 lakhs (Rs.Three lakhs forty thousand only) with Court No.38, Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai within one week from today. Ad-interim anticipatory bail granted on 8th August 2011 is hereby made absolute with a condition that the applicant shall appear at the concerned Police Station on 18th August 2011 at 11.00 a.m. and shall continue to attend the Police Station as and when called for the purposes of interrogation. The Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA, J.) mst 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO._____ OF 2011 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.656 OF 2011 Sanjay Shivram Panchal Applicant versus State of Maharashtra Respondent and Arvind Mulchand Shah Int.Applicant Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr.Yogesh S. Yagnik for the intervenor. Mr.U.L.Shah for applicant. Smt.S.V.Sonawane, APP for the State. CORAM : J.H.Bhatia, J. DATE : 16th August 2011 PC : 1. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. The intervention application be registered. The intervention application is allowed and stands disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA, J.)