1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPEALLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Criminal Application No. 3351 of 2009 Nilkanth s/o Pralhadrao Karhale ... Applicant V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents ... Mr.S.S. Tope, holding for Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for applicant Mr. N.N Jadhav, A.P.P. for State ... CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 17th December, 2009 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel extensively. 2. At the time of directing release of the present applicant and others, certain conditions were imposed by an order dated 29th July, 2009. The present applicant Nilkanth s/o Pralhadrao Karhale was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs) within a stipulated period of two months from the date of the order. It was so effected, considering the aggravated role of applicant Nilkanth s/o Pralhadrao Karhale. His wife was Director, who had also co-ordinated in disbursement of loan, for which 2 separate orders / directions were passed. The loan facility was availed. The role of applicant Nilkantha s/o Pralhadrao Karhale, in the mis-appropriation of poor depositors’ huge amount, and mis- managing the Bank, putting it virtually to a closer, cannot be obliterated. It was, with a view to give at least a boost to run the Bank or liquidate the funds of the poor depositors, the arrangements were directed, however it was not complied. I do not see any change in circumstances while entertaining the application of the applicant Nilkanth s/o Pralhadrao Karhale. I am surprised, in spite of order dated 29th July, 2009, it having not yet complied within the stipulated period of two months, how he could remain with folded hands without any action on his part. Therefore, the application is rejected. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.) srm/cra3351/09 3 4