1appln-2743-10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 2743 of 2010 Chhaya Dharamji Dhotre and anr. Vs.State. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mrs Preeti B.Walimbe, for the Applicants. Mr Y. M. Nakhawa, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 22nd JUNE, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions at length today and also on earlier date on this anticipatory bail application preferred by both the applicants, original accused who are apprehending their arrest in C.R. No. 46/2010 registered by Wagle Estate Police Station, Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 506 read with section 34 of I.P.C. 2. Allegations against the applicants are that they had extracted huge amounts from various candidates for providing job in Air India. The complaint is lodged by one Sunetra Ajay Viswasrao. While passing the earlier order dated 15.6.2010, this Court has expressed the view that said complainant herself may also be involved in the matter in which apparently the present applicants are the 2appln-2743-10 main accused persons as the said complainant after getting acquainted with the present applicants through newspaper advertisement canvassed the scheme of the present applicants to various prospective aspirants seeking job in Air India. According to the complainant, she herself on behalf of various candidates and also various other candidates independently gave amounts to the present applicants for providing job. 3. It is also alleged that even Rs.5,000/- per candidate were obtained by the applicants and also by the complainant, allegedly on behalf of the applicants, for getting the medical check up of the candidates who were in search of jobs. However, no job was provided and as such it is matter of mass scale cheating of persons seeking job in the Government or Semi-government establishments. Allegedly an amount of Rs.21 lacs appears to have been collected by the applicants from various candidates. Considering this factual position, it would not be in the fitness of situation to grant discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected. (b) Investigating Officer to ascertain role of the complainant or anybody else from the office of Airport as co-accused, and take appropriate steps in accordance with law. (c) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merit of the case at the time of trial. (A.R.JOSHI,J) 3appln-2743-10