APPP-434-10.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.434 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1425 OF 2009 Ajit Kumar Oberoi & Anr. ... Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra, Thru' Chaturshringhi Police Station, Pune ... Respondent Mr. S.V. Pitre, i/b. Mr. Rajendra Sorankar, for the Applicant. Mrs. R.V. Newton, APP, for the Respondent. Mr. Shekhar A. Ingawale for the First Informants. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 16 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The Applicants are the accused in several cases which are in respect of the offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Applicants moved this Court for anticipatory bail in connection with the said cases, vide Criminal Application No.1425 of 2009. It appears that, in the course of the hearing of the Anticipatory Bail Application, the Applicants offered to deposit a sum of Rs.7 lacs in this Court "in order to APPP-434-10.sxw 2 Dixit show their bonafides". The Applicants were protected by an interim order for some time, but, ultimately, their application for anticipatory bail was rejected. 3. No orders were passed at that time for the disposal of the amount of Rs.7 lacs, which was deposited by the Applicants, purportedly, for showing their bonafides in the matter. The figure Rs.7 lacs appears to have been derived on the basis of the allegation that the monies belonging to seventeen students, which had been collected in excess of what was actually payable by the said students, were to that extent. 4. After the rejection of the Anticipatory Bail Application, the Applicants came to be arrested. I am informed that they have now been released on bail. 5. Mr. Ingawale, the learned Advocate for the First Informants in various cases, contends that this amount should not be returned to the Applicants. He submits that the amount has been deposited on the basis that it was the ill gotten money, earned by committing the offences in question. 6. I have carefully gone through the relevant orders passed by this Court. It is obvious, that in the hope of procuring anticipatory bail, the Applicants themselves offered to deposit the amount of Rs.7 lacs in the Court. It is clear that the Applicants thought that this would show their bonafides, which would impress the Court in passing an order of anticipatory bail in their favour. However, ultimately, their Anticipatory Bail Application came to be rejected, as aforesaid. There is nothing to indicate that the amount was APPP-434-10.sxw 3 Dixit deposited with an object of distributing it to the First Informants in various cases. Even when the Anticipatory Bail Application was rejected, the Court did not give any directions as to how the said amount was to be utilized. No claim over this amount was made by the Investigating Agency and the amounts, certainly, cannot be said to have been seized in the course of investigation, or deposited in Court by the Applicants for paying it to the various First Informants. 7. There is no doubt that the Applicants continue to be the owners of the said cash. It, therefore, follows that they are entitled to have it back. 8. The Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]