1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Criminal Writ Petition No.1113 of 2008 Jairam M. Jasnani Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Nilesh Pawaskar with Ms.Aparna Vhatkar for petitioner. Mr.A.R.Patil, APP for State. Mr.R.S.Ghadge with Mr.A.S.Desai for resp.no.2. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & J.H.BHATIA,JJ. June 24, 2008 P.C. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who is one of the accused in C.R. No.31 of 2006 registered with the Economic Offences Wing, G.B., C.B., CID, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 read with Section 120B of IPC. The petitioner prays for quashing of the said C.R. 2. We are informed by Mr.Patil, the learned APP that the investigation into the FIR has been completed and the charge-sheet will be filed soon. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the orders of anticipatory bail passed by the 2 Sessions Court and submitted that the subject matter of the complaint filed by the Bank is civil in nature and, therefore, there was no reason to file criminal complaint. He also submitted that the petitioner has not withdrawn any amount nor has he signed any cheques. It was further stated that the Bank has instituted recovery suits in the Co-operative Court and arbitration proceedings have also been initiated. 4. We have perused the complaint dated 23/3/2006 filed on behalf of the Respondent No.2 - Bank and we are satisfied that no interference is called for at this stage when the investigation is already completed. Undoubtedly after the charge-sheet is filed, the petitioner has a remedy to apply for discharge. Hence the petition is rejected. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)