1 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.829/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.979/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.980/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.908/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.824/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.830/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.708/2011; CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.709/2011. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. VD Hon and Mr.NV Gavare, Advocates for the Applicants in respective Criminal Applications; Mr. VH Dighe, APP for State. *** CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 31 st March, 2011. ... 1) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties extensively. 2) The applicant in Criminal Application no.829 of 2011 has paid the borrowed amount of Rs.35,000/- with accrued interest, nothing is due from him. It is informed, an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- of the applicant or his family member is invested with the Patsanstha as Deposits and he has to recover the said amount. 3) Considering these aspects of the matter, custodial interrogation of the applicant/accused – Ashok s/o Sitaram Sonawane not warranted. Interim 2 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. protection dated 28th February, 2011 is made absolute. Criminal Application No. 829/2011 is allowed. 4) The applicant No.2 - Sau. Sushila w/o Devidas Dande in Criminal Application no.979/2011 was a borrower and Mr.Hon, learned Counsel informs, she has deposited the amount. The applicant no. 1 – Anita Vikram Pardeshi (in Criminal Application no.908 of 2011) is not a borrower of the Patsanstha and though huge misappropriation of Rs. 1,56,88,887/- has taken place in the Patsanstha, these two ladies, being female Directors, without any active role in the bunglings in the Patsanstha extended concession on terms. Hence, order, - The interim protection granted in favour of the applicant No.2 – Sau.Sushila w/o Devidas Dande (in Criminal Application no.979/2011)by order dated 9th March, 2011 and order dated 3rd March, 2011, in favour of applicant no.1 – Anita Vikram Pardeshi (in Criminal Application no.908 of 2011) is made absolute. In addition, applicant no.1 – Anita Vikram Pardeshi shall deposit Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) within a month from today, as a Deposit in the Patsanshta for a period of three years. Criminal Application Nos.979/2011 & 908/2011 are 3 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. partly allowed as above. 5) The applicants/accused in rest of the matters were Directors of Namrata Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanshta Limited, Rashin, Tq. Karjat, District Ahmednagar (for short, the Patsanstha) for the respective period, viz. Avinash Ramanlal Doshi, 2001-2006; Dilip Narayan Nashte, 2006-2010; Harishchandra Dhondiba Kolhe, 2006-2010; Dastagir Hiraji Tamboli, 2001-2006 and 2006-2010; Jagdish Kalidas Renukar, 2006-2010; Milind s/o Khandu Masal 2006-2010; Vaibhav Doshi, 2001-2006 and 2006-2010;Sunil Jagannath Devgaonkar, 2001-2006 & 2006-2010; Vikram s/o Dattusingh Pardeshi, 2006-2010; Ramesh Dattatraya Pingale, 2001-20064; Rangnath s/o Dashrath Kangude, 2001-2006. 6) Auditor was directed to conduct an audit of the said Patsanshta for the period from 1.4.2008 to 31.3.2009. By virtue of orders dated 2.9.2010, 6.9.2010 and 20.9.2010, he has carried the audit inspection of the said Patsanshta for the period from 2003-2004 to 2008-2009. In the audit, he noticed an amount of Rs.1,56,88,897/- is misappropriated. It is revealed that Chairman of the Patsanshta – Riyajoddin Sirajoddin Kazi, for himself and his relations, has illegally availed financial benefits of 4 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. more than Rs.50,38,239/-, Director – Allauddin Kazi Rs. 57,49769/-. The auditor has named other Directors, who availed the financial benefits with Chairman and Director – Allauddin they are not before this Court. 7) The learned Counsel for the applicants/accsued submit that these applicants are not borrowers, nor have they availed any loan or facility for the benefit of their relations. They have not recommended the loans to anybody, barring attending few of the meetings, in which their signatures were obtained on dotted lines. The Counsel further submit, whatever mayhem has taken place in the Patsanshta goes to the credit of Chairman and his relations, and not to the applicants, as directors of the Patsanstha. The auditor/complainant has exceeded his limits with sinister idea to harras the directors, who have virtually no role in the so-called misappropriation/mismanagement. 8) The learned APP submits, by pointing original record, that these Directors have activated disbursal of loans; they did not care for prompt recovery of loans and the documentation was nor properly done. 9) With the assistance of learned APP I 5 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. have gone through the Resolutions or the proceedings of the meetings, which have been purportedly attended by these directors. Few of the entries concerning taking action about defaulting borrowers in the hand-writing of Secretary appears to be interpolated as numbers of subsequent Resolutions are changed/altered. 10)Learned APP points to the provisions of Section Section 73-1(AB)of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, which dictate that the members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the decisions taken by the Committee during its term, relating to the business of society. The members of the committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the acts and omissions detriment to the interest of the society. The law also contemplate mandatorily, every such member shall execute a bond to that effect within fifteen days of his assuming the office in the form as specified by the State Government by general or special order. 11)The bye-laws of the Patsanstha, clause No.1.9, illustrate that the Directors have to keep control, track on the accounts, cause inquiry about the arrears and sticky loans, cause recovery 6 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. proceedings in time, they have to follow with rigidity disbursal of the loan and even accepting the deposits from such depositors. 12)The above legal position is essentially obliterated. Even if the Directors either have signed on blank proceedings , they are bound to pay the price for the same. The Patsanstha as a whole is put to lurch as depositors money, ranging to around 4,21,00,000/- is involved. Recoveries have become difficult due to deliberate incomplete documentation. 13)The contention that the record is available with the Bank or Administrator by itself would not be a ground to entertain for pre-arrest bail. Loss to the public exchequer caused due to tacit understanding of these applicants has fractured the faith and confidence of ordinary depositors in the affairs of the Patsanshta. 14)Taking these facts into consideration, I do not see any reason to entertain the applications. The Criminal applications 708/2011; 709/2011; 824/2011; 830/2011 & 980/2011 lack merit, dismissed. Criminal Application Nos.908/2011 and 979/2011 in so far as they relate to applicants – Vikram Pardeshi and Rangnath Kangude, are dismissed. Interim protection 7 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. granted earlier in favour of the applicants is extended up to 11th April, 2011. 15)The Applicant/accused in Criminal Application No.980/2011 was Serving as Secretary with the Patsanstha. 16)The record illustrate, he, taking advantage of his position to be an officer of the Patsanstha and the confidence/faith that was reposed in him, manipulated the record, prepared documents in such manner to ensure benefit to the Chairman of the Patsanstha or his relations and few of the borrowers. Though he claims to have taken prompt action, it is primarily an eyewash. The borrowers had no repaying capacity, still they were favoured. Documents are left with unfilled blanks. In few case, only application form is on record. Slumber in recovery was demonstrated at the behest and active participation of the applicant as a Secretary. 17)He has interpolated few of the Resolutions to impress his concern in eradicating the bad debts with roots by putting in the mouth of some of the Directors that sticky loans are to be recovered vigorously, naming the Chairman/his relations. The interpolation in Resolutionis quite 8 Cri.Appln.No.829/2011 & Ors. clear. The applicant as a Secretary has to follow rules and by-laws, he simply ignored it. Application lacks merit, dismissed. Interim protection extended till 11th April, 2011. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/