The State Of Maharashtra And Others v. Dr Eknath Khanderao Patil

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6764 OF 2016 IN CRI.WRIT PETITION NO.734 OF 2016 The State of Maharashtra and others Vs. Dr.Eknath Khanderao Patil.

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Court's or Judge's orders Mrs.M.A.Deshpande, A.P.P. for the State.

Mr.B.S.Deshmukh, advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND K.L.WADANE,JJ.

Date : 16.12.2016.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard.

2.

Mrs.Deshpande, learned A.P.P. submits that the Writ Petition No.734/2016 was disposed of on the basis of the statement made by the learned A.P.P. on instructions of the Investigating Officer that within a month, charge-sheet would be filed against 17 persons who were arrested and as far as five persons who are not arrested, the steps are being taken against them and supplementary charge-sheet would be filed. The learned A.P.P. states that after the order passed by this Court, the Investigation Officer had discussion with the higher authority regarding applicability of Section 3 of the

Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. The Additional Director General of Police had permitted to add Section 3 of MPID Act, 1999 to Crime No.2/2011, registered at Chopda City Police Station, Jalgaon and further directions are given to the Investigation Officer to submit its report. The Investigating Officer had also reported to the JMFC, Chopda, regarding the addition of Section 3 of MPID Act, in Crime No.2/2011. The matter is required to be investigated further as per Section 3 of MPID Act. As such some time is required to submit the charge-sheet against 17 persons and it may not be possible to submit the charge-sheet within one month as was undertaken earlier. As such further six months time be granted to submit the charge-sheet in view of the subsequent development. 3.

We have heard Mr.B.S.Deshmukh, learned counsel who is appearing for Respondent. We have considered the reasons given in the application, so also the subsequent developments which have taken place of addition of further charge U/s 3 of MPID Act, 1999. 4.

In view of the above, we allow the Criminal Application in terms of prayer clause (B).

5.

The Criminal Application is disposed of.

(K.L.WADANE,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.16.12.2016.

asp/office/Criapp6764.16