Anjali W/O. Bhagwanrao Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra

{1} drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1381 OF 2022 Anjali Bhagwanrao Pawar APPLICANT

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .......

Mr. P. P. More, Advocate for the applicant Mr. A. V. Deshmukh, APP for respondent - State .......

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.] DATE : 14 th NOVEMBER, 2022 ORDER :

1.

The applicant was the Director of Aditya Arthik Niyojan Multistate Co-operative Credit Society Limited, Pune (for short "Credit Society"). The applicant tendered resignation from the post of Director on 10th September, 2013. The Board of Directors accepted her resignation on 28th January, 2014. 2.

The informant - a depositor of the said credit society, lodged FIR on 6th February, 2016 alleging that at the instance of the Chairman and other directors of the Credit Society, he deposited an amount of Rs.7,65,000/- in the said Credit Society, however, after maturity, the amount along with interest was not returned to him. It is further alleged that the Board of Directors

{2} of the Credit Society closed the branch and absconded. Hence, the present crime is registered at Crime No. 26 of 2016 with Murud Police Station, District - Latur for the offence punishable under sections 406, 418, 420, 468 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 of the MPID Act.

3.

Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. Perused the papers of investigation.

4.

Admittedly, charge sheet is filed in the present case on 30th April, 2016. It is informed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the Chairman and some of the Directors were arrested and they are released on bail.

5.

The informant has not named the applicant as a director who instigated him to keep the fixed deposit. One of the Directors, who is similarly situated as that of the present applicant, namely Ravi Bhagwanrao Bhosale is granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court, Latur on 29th May, 2016. 6.

The applicant, pursuant to the interim protection granted to her, has attended the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and has co-operated in the investigation. Considering the fact that the applicant has

{3} resigned from the post of Director in the year 2013 and similarly situated Director is granted anticipatory bail so also considering the fact that charge sheet is already filed in the matter, way back in 2016, custodial interrogation and / or detention of the applicant is not warranted in the facts of the present case. 7.

In that view of the matter, the application is allowed in terms of the interim order.

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI] JUDGE drp/aba1381-22