1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3898 OF 2011 Pradnya Bhaurao Pawar, age 29 years, occ. Business, r/o Bhadgaon Road,Pachora, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, ...Respondent ..... Shri K.P.Chaware, advocate for applicant Smt. R.K.Ladda, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 20th September, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose and heard learned counsel for the parties finally. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail apprehending her arrest under C.R. No. 2 119 of 2011, registered at Pachora police station, District Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 109, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the crime has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Vijaykumar Narayan Patil on 31.7.2011. It is alleged that the accused persons formed a Company under the name and style as, “Divine Life Complete Shopping and Marketing Private Limited, Jalgaon” of which Branch was situated at Pachora. It is also alleged that the applicant was acting as an agent of the said Company and she had induced the complainant to deposit amount in the Company by misrepresenting the complainant that if he deposits an amount of Rs.2,10,000/-, he would get interest of Rs.15,257/- per month for the period of two years. Thus, relying on the misrepresentation of the applicant, the complainant has deposited amount of Rs.2,10,000/- in the said Company. However, it is alleged that the complainant did not receive any amount as assured by the applicant and the other co-accused persons. Hence, he lodged the report against them with Pachora police station as afore said. 3 4 During the course of the investigation, house search of the mother of the applicant was conducted and several vital documents were seized therefrom. 5 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor canvassed that seven receipts of Rs.30,000/- each, dated 7.10.2009, issued to the complainant bear the signatures of the applicant as recipient of the total amount of Rs.2,10,000/-. Moreover, learned Additional Public Prosecutor also pointed out that another complaint was filed under C.R. No. 303 of 2011 on 7.9.2011 against the co-accused as well as the applicant herein in respect of embezzlement of the amount. 6 It is also pointed out by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that amount of Rs.2,10,000/- in the present C.R. No. 119 of 2011 is yet to be recovered . Moreover, it is further pointed out that total siphoned amount to the tune of Rs. 10,29,500/- is yet to be recovered and the Chairman of the afore said Company, namely Vinod Hilal Patil and other six co- accused including the applicant are still absconding and they are 4 not available for investigation purpose. 7 Considering the accusations made against the applicant and nature and gravity thereof and the range of the alleged siphoned amount, it is apparent that custodial interrogation of the applicant is imperative for the further progress in the investigation in proper perspective, and hence, present application deserves to be rejected. 8 In the result, present application lacks merits and is dismissed. 9 The present application stands disposed of finally. 10 The above observations are prima facie in nature and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding the same on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3898.11