1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3335 of 2009 (Noor Jaha Begum Vs. The State) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate., for the applicant. Mr. D.R.Korde, APP, for respondent State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 14/10/2009 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the accused/applicant and learned A.P.P. 2. The accused/applicant, who is a Director in Hina Shahin Cooperative Bank Ltd., Beed, seeks discretion in terms of Section 438 Cr.P.C., in Crime No.42/2009, registered at City Beed Police Station, dist. Beed. 3. The Counsel, while urging for grant of bail to the applicant, contends that there are affidavits 2 of the borrowers accepting liability to make good the advances for which they have sought time with the Bank authorities. The affidavits are at Exh.C, page no.44 onwards. The Counsel submits, at the material time, in the year 2006, she has delivered twins and naturally could not keep control over the Bank and her signatures to the resolutions are forged. If her signatures were forged, in the year 2006, nothing prevented her to agitate the same in due course of time. I find substance in such contention of learned A.P.P. It is a matter of record that an amount of Rs.35 lacs is disbursed to several persons on the recommendations of the accused/applicant. She has coordinated loans to her near relations, employees namely, Feroz Khan, Sk.Saluddin, Sk.Asad, Rahima Begum, Ayub Khan, Ishakhan. Thus, the total loan amount appears to be more than Rs.34 lacs. The amount is outstanding. The affidavits of such borrowers by 3 itself will not be giving a licence for inaction and illegalities committed by the accused/applicant, a Director at the material time. It is easy for her to contend her signatures are forged, however, unless admitted signatures with those are disputed are examined, the same cannot be commented to. Custodial interrogation will reveal other associates of the accused/applicant. Though I quite see her husband was taken in custody and subsequently released, however, that by itself will not be a parameter to extend pre- arrest bail to the accused/applicant. Her role is crucial, quite distinct in the embezzlement where faith of the poor depositors is shattered and they are duped. 4. Custodial interrogation will resolve the deliberate loopholes activated in disbursement of the loans. 4 Hence, application rejected. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/3335-09crapl