1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4319 OF 2009 Sadhu @ Sahadeo Pandurang Gaikwad, Age-45 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Gunjoti, Tq.Omerga, Dist. Osmanabad, The Chairman, Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society, Shop No.1 and 2 APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.V.Gaware, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.N.B.Khandare, learned public prosecutor for respondent State. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4320 OF 2009 1. Shobha W/o.Balaji Potdar, Age-35 years, Occu-Business and Household, R/o.Gunjoti, Tq.Omerga, Dist. Osmanabad 2. Kamlakar Govindrao Nikam, Age-39 years, Occu-Business, Ro.Nagral (G), Tq.Omerga, Dist : Osmanabad APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.V.Gaware, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.N.B.Khandare, learned public prosecutor for respondent State. 2 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4322 OF 2009 Balaji S/o.Govind Potdar, Age-40 years, Occu-Salesman, R/o.Gunjoti, Tq.Omerga, Dist. Osmanabad APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.V.Gaware, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.N.B.Khandare, learned public prosecutor for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 08/01/2010 PER COURT : 1. By these applications, the applicant in Cri.Appl.4319/2009 who is the Chairman of Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society, Gunjoti, the applicants who are the fair price owners in Cri.Appl. 4320/2009 and the salesman of the society of which the applicant in Cri.Appl.4319/2009 is the Chairman is the applicant in Cri.Appl. 4322/2009, have approached this Court for their release on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.184/2009, registered in Omerga Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.409, 420, 467, 468, 471, r/w. 34 of IPC, and u/s. 3 and 7 of The Essential Commodities Act. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants followed by 3 the submissions of learned public prosecutor appearing for the State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. Considering these submissions across the bar, it appears that the crime no.184/2009 was registered in Omerga police Station in the racket burst about the mis-appropriation of wheat stored in the government godown at Omerga which was distributed and disbursed at the hands of the Supply Officer, Omerga who is the applicant in Cri.Appl.No.4257/2009 and was under the control of godown keeper, the applicant in Cri.Appl.4261/2009. According to learned counsel appearing for these applicants, it is urged across the bar that during the inquiry, notices were issued to these applicants. At the initial stage, these applicants in their reply supported the complainant that they have not received the wheat which was disbursed in their name and later on they have retracted their statement as according to them, in the retracted statement, they have come up with a case that they have received the wheat which was disbursed by the government godown under the control of godown keeper applicant in Cri.Appl. 4261/2009, and under the permit signed by the applicant in Cri.Appl.4257/2009, hence they are falsely implicated in the present case. 4. Considering these submissions across the bar which were opposed by learned public prosecutor on the ground that while arguing in the Application No.4257/2009 and 4261/2009, he has tendered the register showing the demand letter. In that demand 4 book, it is specifically pointed out that the requisitions which are submitted on behalf of the applicants in Cri.Appl.No.4319/2009 and 4320/2009 that there was no demand on behalf of these applicants to supply or to provide the wheat under the APL scheme. If there is no demand then there is no question that demand to be accepted. Consideration of this demand to be paid in the govenment treasury by way of challan and the goods received in this scheme to be distributed to the card holders of which some of the statements were recorded during the investigation. In the premise, as these applicants are shielding the government officers, the principal accused, it is urged that the bail application of these applicants also to be rejected. 5. Considering these submissions across the bar and as I had an occasion to go through the register of demand, wherein I did not found that any demand is placed on behalf of the applicant in Cri.Appl. No.4319/2009 and applicant in Cri.Appl.4320/2009 about the supply of wheat under the APL scheme for which the applicant in Cri.Appl.4322/2009 is authorized to apply by the Chairman of the Society and the members of the society who is the applicant in Cri.Appl.No.4319/2009. It appears that even though the statement of some of the card holders were recorded that they have received the wheat on their card of which there is some inter pollution or alternation in the record produced by the applicant in Cri.Appl. 4322/2009, the fact is clear that if there is no demand, then there can not be any supply of goods, and if the goods which are not 5 supplied for which record is created and prepared at the hands of these applicants, then there is prima facie case against these applicants to abate the offence committed by the government officials. No case is made out to enlarge the applicants on bail. Hence all the applications stand rejected. 6. After the order is dictated, learned counsel for applicants in all the applications, has requested to continue the protection granted in favour of these applicants for further period of 2 weeks. As these applicants were enjoying the liberty of interim protection, protection extended for further period of 2 weeks. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JAN 2010/cri.appl.4319-09