1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (APPP) No.630/2011 in Criminal Application (ABA) No.21/2011 (D) ( Shridhar S/o Appaji Wani ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., Wadgaon Road P.S., Distt. Yavatmal ) With Criminal Application (APPP) No.686/2011 in Criminal Application (ABA) No.9/2011 (D) ( Bhaurao Shamrao Waware ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., Wadgaon Road, Tq. and Distt. Yavatmal ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. M.B. Naidu, Adv. for applicant (in Cri. Apln. (APPP) No.630/2011) Mr. B.J. Lonare, Adv. for applicant (in Cri. Apln. (APPP) No.686/2011) Mr S.S. Doifode, APP for State. CORAM : M.N. GILANI, J. DATED : 28.11.2011. Common order. 1. Both these applications are arising out of Crime No.358/2010 registered with the police station Wadgaon Road, Yavatmal for the offence punishable under sections 420, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The applicant Shridhar S/o Appaji Wani in Criminal Application No.630/2011 is an Executive Engineer, Minor 2 Irrigation (Local Sector), Division Yavatmal. The applicant Bhaurao Shamrao Waware in Criminal Application No.686/2011 is Superintending Engineer, Water Conservation Department, Amravati. 3. The office of the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Yavatmal was to implement Indo-German Project of creating a facility of irrigation of agricultural land and for that three villages in the district Yavatmal were selected. The cost of the project was Rs.three Crore Twenty Seven Lakh. To implement the said project, the tenders were invited. There are rules providing for publication of tender notices i.e. the publication should be in two local newspapers and one widely circulated news paper. The communication to the newspapers is sent through the Publicity Department, Government of Maharashtra at Mumbai. Accordingly, the communication was sent through a special messenger. The acknowledgment to this effect was received by the office of the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Yavatmal. So far as the publication of tender notices in two local newspapers is concerned, there is no dispute. 4. Before February 2010 the copy of the newspaper 3 was received in the office and on that basis file moved. The cost of publication was sanctioned. Later on it was revealed that the requisition sent by the office at Yavatmal never reached to the office of Hitvada newspaper and in turn no tender notice was published. Presumably, this was done to reduce the competitors and in turn to cause wrongful gain to the contractor and wrongful loss to the Government exchequer. 5. In this connection, police arrested Sudhakar Sapkal, who was released on anticipatory bail. Both the applicants are claiming innocence on the ground that they have no role to play in the alleged offence. The modus operandi has to be divided in two phases. So far as the first phase is concerned i.e. sending requisition to the publicity department of Government of Maharashtra and in turn publicity department acknowledging the same, there is no dispute. The requisition for publication of tender notice was duly dispatched from the office at Yavatmal and it had reached to publicity department at Mumbai. The office got the acknowledgment. The second phase is receipt of the news paper. Admittedly, the news paper which was received not by the present applicant but by some other Clerk in the office. As usual, the files were processed and the amount to be 4 paid to the Hitvada newspaper was sanctioned. 6. Mr. Doifode, learned A.P.P. for State/respondent, did not point out any material to show that both these applicants either knew or had a reason to believe that the advertisement was never published in the Hitvada newspaper or that the paper which was received was a fake copy or that they along with others hatched a conspiracy. Needles to say that for some or the other reason entire project was dropped. 7. This Court (Coram : P.D. Kode, J) after considering the averments in the application passed interim order in Criminal Application No.9/2011 on 17/1/2011 and similar order in Criminal Application No.21/2011 on 25/1/2011. Thereafter, this Court (Coram : P.D. Kode, J) in Criminal Application No.9/2011 after hearing the parties passed interim order on 27/1/2011 and similar order was passed in Criminal Application No.21/2011 on 23/2/2011 with following directions. “Hence, interim protection granted vide order dated 25.1.2011 is hereby extended up till 21st April, 2011 on same terms and conditions passed vide order dated 25.1.2011 with the modification that now the applicant shall attend on every Monday and so also as and when called by the Investigating officer. 5 Liberty to the prosecution, with due notice to the other side, to apply for modification of the order including the cancellation, if warranted by the circumstances. Liberty to the applicant to move for extension at appropriate juncture.” 8. Again this Court (Coram : P.D. Kode, J) extended the said interim orders dated 17/1/2011 and 25/1/2011. Since then and from time to time interim protection was extended. 9. It is pertinent to note that the State did not apply for cancellation of order nor complained of any breach of the conditions of order. 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case both the applications are allowed. The interim orders dated 17/1/2011 (in Criminal Application No.9/2011) and 25/1/2011 (in Criminal Application No.21/2011) passed by this Court stands confirmed subject to condition that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. JUDGE Tambaskar.