1 Cri.A.1727.11+6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD (1) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1727 OF 2011 . Sau Kamalben Purushottam Patil 72. Vidhya Vihar Colony, Mohide T.H. Tq. Shahada, District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (2) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1511 OF 2011 . Mohan Bhikkan Choudhari, R/o village Prakasha Tq. Shahada, District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (3) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1512 OF 2011 . Ashok S/o Chatur Bagul R/o Ghee Bazar,Shahada, Tq. Shahada, District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 Cri.A.1727.11+6 WITH (4) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1607 OF 2011 . Hitanshu S/o Bhaatubhai @ Bhatu Patel R/o Giri Vihar Society, Nandurbar, Tq. and District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (5) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1725 OF 2011 . Ravindra Bhikamchand Jain R/o main Road Shahada Tq. Shahada, District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (6) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1726 OF 2011 . Annasaheb S/o Purushottam Kalu Patil 72. Vidhya Vihar Colony, Mohide T.H. Tq. Shahada, District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. 3 Cri.A.1727.11+6 WITH (7) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1729 OF 2011 . Jitendra Chimanlal Shah, R/o 1265, Agra Road, Dhule, Tq. And District Nandurbar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and another. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri. P.P. Chavan,Advocate for Applicants (in Cri. Appln. Nos.1727.11 1725.11. and 1726.2011) Shri. C.R. Deshpande,Advocate for Applicants (in Cri. Appln. Nos. 1511..11, 1512.11 and 16.07.11) Shri. H.F.Pawar,Advocate for Applicant (in Cri. Appln. Nos.1729.11) Shri.N.H.Borade, A.P.P. for Respondents. Shri.S.U.Choudhari,Advocate for Ori.complainant. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 28TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : 1. All applications are filed for anticipatory bail, in Crime No. 173 of 2011, registered with City Police Station, Nandurbar, District Nandurbar for the offence punishable under sections 406, 408, 417, 418, 420, 421, 422 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 146 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. 2. APP has made some papers of investigation available. The applicants 4 Cri.A.1727.11+6 have also produced some record. Both sides are heard. 3. A crime is registered on the basis of report given by Special Auditor, who did the Audit of Shri P.K.Anna Patil Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. Nandurbar, for the period 2003-2006. After completing Audit, he first submitted a report to Joint Register, Co-operatives and the office of Joint Registrar gave direction to him to lodge report to Police. Prior to lodging the report, notices were given to Directors and others and explanation was sought. 4. In the report, it is contended that Director Board of this bank and the employees of the bank in collusion with each other sanctioned big loans to the persons, who had either not given security for loan or had not given sufficient security for loan. Allegations are made that borrowers were either close relatives of the Directors, Chairman or they were friends of the office bearers. There is also allegation that in respect of loan transaction, even stamp duty was not paid and loss was caused to State-Exchequer. Allegations are there that fraud of amount of Rs. 23.93 Crores is committed against depositors. Auditor has identified 60 such borrowers and the list is annexed with the report. Today, during the course of argument APP submitted that more borrowers need to be included like Starch Factory and 5 Cri.A.1727.11+6 Satpuda Sugar Factory. It was submitted that these Institutions are under the control of the founder member of the Bank Mr. Purushottam Patil and amount of more than 46 Crores was sanctioned to them, when there was no sufficient security for giving loan. 5. The applicant from proceeding No. 1727.11 was Chairman of this Bank at the relevant time. Applicant from proceeding No. 1726 of 2011 was Director. He is also founder member of the bank and is husband of the Chairman. Applicant from proceeding No. 1725.11 was Director of the Bank. Applicant from proceeding No. 1607.11 was General Manager for the some period and was co-coordinator for remaining period. Applicant from proceeding No.1511.11 was Branch Manager of Dhule Branch and Applicant from proceeding No. 1512.11 was Director of the Bank for some period, and applicant from proceeding N0. 1729.11 was also Director for some period. Bank has gone into liquidation. Allegations are there that when there was prohibition to give loan to the relatives of Directors, such loan was given. Allegations are there that some borrowers have sold the property, which was shown as security but no action is taken. Allegations are there that necessary forms were not filled for loan transactions and there are irregularities. There are there allegations that when it was not desirable to renew the loan transactions, irregular loan transactions were 6 Cri.A.1727.11+6 renewed by the Directors. Allegations are there that statements of stocks were not obtained when hypothecation loans were given. Allegations are there that valuation report in respect of the property offered by security was not obtained and the loans beyond the limit of the bank were given. 6. For applicant from proceeding Nos. 1725.11 it was argued that he is old aged person and he is suffering from heart diseased. Attention of this Court was drawn to some observations made by the Sessions Court in the order dated 30.03.2011, by which his application came to be rejected. At this stage, Advocate for applicants from Proceeding Nos. 1727.11, 1726.11 and 1725.11 submitted that if this Court is not inclined to grant bail, he may be permitted to withdraw the applications. 7. It was submitted for the applicant from proceeding No.1729.11 that the Director Board has relied on the record which was scrutinized by different departments of Bank. It was submitted that Board acted on the basis of such record and so board cannot be held responsible. On the other hand, Advocate for the proceedings filed for Branch Manager and General Manger submitted that they are required to follow the directions of Board of Director and they cannot be blamed. At this stage, Advocate for applicants from proceeding No. 1511.11, 1512.11 and 1607.11 submitted 7 Cri.A.1727.11+6 that if this Court is not inclined to allow applications he may be permitted to withdraw the applications. Such conditional withdrawal is not possible. So, submission for un-conditional withdrawal was made. 8. At this stage, Advocate for the applicant from proceeding No. 1729.11 submitted that if this Court is not inclined to allow the application, he may be permitted to withdraw the application. 9. At this stage, all Advocates for the respective applicants, on instructions submitted that they may be allowed to withdraw the applications. Leave granted. All the applications are disposed off as withdrawn. 10. The amount which has been already deposited by the applicants in the bank be kept in Fixed Deposit. The Registrar (Judicial) to take necessary steps in this regard, as per rules. Sd/- [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK 8 Cri.A.1727.11+6