1 Cri.B.A.No.461/22­Ex.1 Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No. 461/2022

Balasaheb Rupchand Madhwai .. Applicant Accused.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra through Police Inspector, Adgaon Police Station, Nashik. (Cr. No.I 158/2021)
.. Prosecution

Order below Exh.1.

1.This is the subsequent application filed by the applicant/accused under section 439 of Cr.P.C. for r releasing him on regular bail in the aforesaid Crime registered at Adgaon Police Station, for the offence punishable under section 420, 409, 468 r/w. 34 of the IPC.

2.The FIR was lodged on 10.10.2021 by one Sanjay Shamrao Lolage who is working as a Government Auditor, alleging therein that he has conducted Audit of the Society by name Durga Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Adgaon, Tal. & Dist. Nashik ( here­inafter referred as “Society”) for the period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2015. He detected various instances of financial irregularities and misappropriation to the tune of Rs. 2,76,01,040/­. Accordingly, he prepared the audit report and submitted to the Competent Authority.

In pursuance of his report, the Competent Authority directed the complainant to lodge report against the perpetrators. Accordingly, he filed report against all the Directors, Branch Manager, staff members,
Recovery Officer and the beneficiaries. The crime bearing CR No. 158/2021 was registered against the applicant and others. The applicant was arrested on 22.02.2022 and since then, he is in judicial custody.

3.The learned defence Counsel Advocate Shri R.J.Kasliwal has submitted that he has filed the instant application owing to change in circumstances. The first ground is that the co­accused Ravindra Madhwai was protected by Hon’ble Supreme Court vide adinterim Order dated 21.03.2022 till decision of the main application.

So on that ground, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail.

The second ground is that the applicant is in custody for almost 50­55 days and there is no progress in the investigation. So his further detention would not serve any purpose. He placed his reliance on the authorities reported in the case of Union of India Vs. Yogesh Narayanrao Deshmukh, 2022(1) Bom.C.R.(Cri) 112, and Laxman Irappa Hatti Vs. The State of Maharashtra, 2004 Cri.L.J. 3802.

Relying on the authorities, it was the contention of learned counsel that the object of economic offence is to recover the amount from the accused. So if the applicant is kept behind bar, certainly his business would suffer and he cannot pay the amount if later, any liability is found on him. It is his further contention that the detention of the applicant amounts to pre­trial detention which would certainly curtail his liberty and is against the established principles of law. The learned counsel has further placed his reliance on the authority reported in Vallurupalli Raja Sekhar Reddy Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2022(1) Bom.C.R.(Cri) 124. It is contended that if there is no progress in the investigation, accused is entitled for bail.

4.Against this, the ld. APP Smt. Jadhav has vehemently argued that offence is serious in nature, the punishment prescribed for the offence is life imprisonment. There is no substantial change in the circumstances to file the present application. She further submitted that during investigation it revealed that the applicant has withdrawn in all Rs.64,10,000/­ from A/c. No.207 of the Society from time to time through Cheques. The investigation to that effect is still going on. In support of her contentions, she relied on the cases reported in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs. Ranesh Ranjan @
Pappu Yadav, (2005) SCC(Cri) 489 and Ashok Pundalik Gavade Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2019) ALLMR(Cri) 1866 and lastly submitted that application be rejected.

5.After going through the case­diary, it appears that the concerned Investigating Officer is still enquiring with the concerned persons about the amount of Rs. 64,10,000/­ allegedly withdrawn by the applicant from sister concern of Durga Nagari Sanstha. So, when the investigation is in progress, certainly the apprehension of the prosecution that if the applicant gets bail, he may create hurdle and possibility of tampering cannot be ruled out. As regards the contention of learned counsel Mr. Kasliwal regarding the interim protection granted to co­accused Ravindra Madhwai by Honble Supreme Court is concerned, it appears that the said application is not decided on merits. He is protected on the ground that the lower court has granted bail to 9 accused persons. The learned counsel knows very well that these 9 accused persons were protected by this Court itself when the Investigating officer could not point out any kind of link between them and the alleged misappropriation of Rs.2,76,01,040/­.

So, the applicant cannot take advantage of the fact that co­accused is protected by Hon’ble Apex Court despite his involvement. It is not the case that co­accused Ravindra Madhwai was protected after hearing his bail plea on merits, in that case, it would be a good ground for him to apply for bail on the ground of changed circumstances. Coaccused’s application is still pending for disposal before Hon’ble Apex Court. Another contention of learned counsel that he was in custody for almost 50 days and there is no progress in the investigation is concerned, I do not agree with him. The case diary shows progress in the matter. There is a specific allegation against the applicant that he has withdrawn Rs. 64,10,000 /­ by way of cheques during the period from 2010 to 2011 at different times. The contention of the defence that it was the Bank Manager Mr. Kolhe now deceased, has forged the signature of the applicant and has withdrawn the amount. As far as this contention is concerned, it cannot be believed at this stage that he was not having knowledge about such huge withdrawal in his name by the Manager. Even otherwise the role of the applicant is far greater than the co­accused Ravindra Madwai. Hence, I am not inclined to allow the application as investigation is still in progress.

O r d e r

Application stands rejected.

Digitally signed by NAIR NAIR SANDHYA SANDHYA SUNIL SUNIL Date:( Smt. S.S.Nair 2022.04.18 ), 11:14:25 -0600 16.04.2022. Addl. Sessions Judge­4, Nashik. 5