1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3761 of 2008 Chougonda Balgonda Patil .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr.G.M.Savagave, for the applicant. Mr.Y.G.Yagnik, A.P.P., for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 20TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 20TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 20TH NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr.Savagave, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.Yagnik, learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.97 of 2008 of Jaysingpur police station, Dist.Kolhapur. The said crime has been registered against the applicant and seventeen others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of the IPC. The applicant is a Director of Dharmanath Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Jaisingpur, Dist.-Kolhapur. 3. The Auditor, Co-operative Department, Kolhapur has lodged an FIR on 30.9.2008 against all the accused persons, on the basis of the Auditor’s 2 2 2 report dated 30.11.2007. It is alleged that during the period between 1.4.2005 and 31.3.2006 all the accused, who were members of the Board of Directors at the relevant time, committed several illegalities/irregularities in sanctioning the loans to the undeserving persons and have caused loss to the credit society of Rs.3.75 crores. It is further alleged that the accused sanctioned loans in favour of their relatives and friends, without following the due procedure and without verifying their repayment capacity and as a result of which the credit society could not recover the loans/interest from the borrowers. Prima facie, I am satisfied that the applicant has committed the offence under sections 406 and 420 of IPC. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for quite some time and with their assistance have gone through the entire material placed before the Court. The evidence consists mostly of documents, which are already in possession of the investigating agency. I am satisfied that there is no likelihood of the accused absconding or misusing liberty. It is well settled that an order of 3 3 3 anticipatory bail, as observed in Gurubaksha Singh Vs. State of Punjab -AIR 1980 SC 1632, does not in any way directly or indirectly take away from police their right to investigate into charges made or to be made against the person released on bail. The usual conditions imposed while releasing the accused on anticipatory bail, like cooperating the police in investigation and not to tamper the witnesses, sufficiently take care, coupled with the fact that if the police require the custody at any stage, they can apply to the court for that purpose. Merely because prima facie case is made out against the applicant, that itself cannot be a ground for rejecting the application for anticipatory bail. The case, like one in hand, what is important is to see whether public money can be secured by imposing further conditions on the applicant. 5. Counsel for the applicant has placed two affidavits dated 12.11.2008 and 18.11.2008. All these affidavits are taken on record and marked "X-1" and "X-2". In these affidavits, the applicant has given the particulars of the immovable properties and the fixed deposits with Dharmanath Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha, Jaisingpur, stating that they shall not dispose them of or create third party rights or 4 4 4 withdraw the fixed deposits during pendency of these proceedings and the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act to fix the liability against the applicant. Statements made on affidavits and the undertakings given therein are accepted. Having considered the affidavits and 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 to be enlarged on bail in C.R. No.97 of 2008 of Jaysingpur police station, Dist.Kolhapur, in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to condition that he shall report to the concerned police station on every alternate Saturday between 9 and 10 am 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 without being influenced by the observations made in this order. . The application is disposed of. 5 5 5 (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)