1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.667 OF 2009 Rajesh Vasant Jawalekar .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.A.P.Mundargi, Senior Counsel i/b Harshad Nimbalkar for the applicant. Mr.K.V.Saste A.P.P. for the State. Mr.H.E.Palwe for the intervenor. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 18th June, 2009 P.C. Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the intervenor and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.304 of 2008 of Sahakarnagar Police Station, District Pune. The said crime has been registered against the applicant and others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 406, 409, 420 r/w 34 of IPC. 3. The applicant and his family members are the borrowers and the total outstanding amount as of today is about Rs.12 2 crores. According to Mr.Mundargi, learned senior counsel for the applicant, the applicant has taken responsibility to repay the entire amount of loans, taken by him and his relatives. There is no dispute that certain properties were mortgaged in favour of the bank, by way of security, by the applicant and his relatives. According to the applicant, the properties mortgaged in favour of the bank are worth more than Rs.12 crores and they are sufficient to secure the amount of loan. Therefore, it was submitted that the case of the present applicant do not fall within the parameters of the allegations made in the instant complaint. This court vide order dated 24.3.2009 had appointed a valuer to verify the valuation of the properties mortgaged in favour of the bank. Accordingly, the valuation has been done and the report has also been placed on record. According to the valuer, the properties mortgaged in favour of the bank are worth Rs.13 crores. Apart from the properties which were directed to be valued, Mr.Mundargi submitted that one more property bearing Gat No.90 situate at village Solu, Taluka Khed, District Pune has also been mortgaged in favour of the bank and it is in their possession. According to Mr.Mundargi, this property is also worth Rs.4 crores. I do not wish to make any comment on the valuation of this property (Gat No.9). However, having considered the valuation report in respect of the properties mortgaged and considering 3 overall facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant this application for anticipatory bail. Hence the following order: In the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties to make up the said amount, subject to the conditions incorporated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Further, the applicant is directed to report to the concerned police station on the first Saturday of every month between 6 pm and 7 pm for a period of 90 days or till filing of the chargesheet, whichever is earlier. While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Application is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)