1. This is an application filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicants seek quashing of order rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Aurangabad, taking cognizance of offences in a complaint case filed by the respondent No. 2, bearing R.C.C. No. 535/2008. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, issued process against present applicants for offences punishable under section 405, 406, 417, 420 read with section 34 of I.P. Code.

2. At this stage, it is not necessary to elaborately set out the averments made in the complaint. Suffice it to say that the complainant claims to be Chairman of Centron Employees Cooperative Credit Society. The employees of Centron Company are members of the Credit Society. The Centron Company gave an undertaking to deduct amounts of instalments of loans granted to the members by the Credit Society from their monthly Pay Bills and to forward such amounts to the Credit Society. The Cooperative Credit Society is duly registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The members of the Credit Society were eligible to seek loans on (3) giving of undertaking that the instalments could be recovered directly from the employer i.e. Centron Company. The Company allegedly deducted such amounts of loan instalments from the monthly Pay Bills of the employees. The deducted amounts were not, however, credited to the account of the Cooperative Credit Society run. The complainant, therefore, alleges that the amounts were misappropriated because they were recovered for payment to be made to the Credit Society, but were not, in fact, so deposited with the Credit Society. The complainant alleges that the Cooperative Credit Society was thus duped by the Centron Company.

3. According to the applicants, the Centron Company was facing financial crisis and was unable to pay the wages to the employees. It was under the control of B.I.F.R. It is contended that there was no malafide intention, least mens rea.

4. The applicants would further submit that all the applicants are roped in the private complaint case without some of them being concerned with the deductions of the amounts from the Pay Bills of the employees of the Centron Company. They would submit that the criminal liability cannot be fastened against all of them or atleast some of them in view of absence of their concern with the financial affairs of the (4) Company. They would further submit that issuance of process by the learned Magistrate against all the applicants is improper, illegal and liable to be quashed.

5. Heard learned advocates for the parties and learned A.P.P.

6. Mr. Patil, would submit that issuance of process could not be ordered when the material on record reveals that the amounts were not deducted because the payments were withheld due to financial difficulties of the Centron Company. He would submit that the amount has been deposited as per the directions of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2710/2008. He would point out that the complainant did not state the fact about such payment as per the order of this Court, in the complaint, it is contended that when this Court has granted interim relief to the effect that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants, the issuance of process is bad in law. It is argued that the applicant Nos. 1 to 3 are not even the share-holders of the Company and are unconcerned with its business. It is further argued that the applicant Nos. 8 and 9 are Lawyer and Consultant, respectively, of the Centron Company and are not at all concerned with its affairs, including the financial liabilities and, hence, could not be (5) roped in as accused. Mr. Patil would further submit that applicant Nos. 6 and 7 are non-Executive Directors. They are not incharge of business of the Company. They only attend the meetings and are not concerned with the conduct of the business of the Company. He would point out that the applicant Nos. 10 and 11 are th