1. Rule, returnable forthwith.

This application is filed for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.259/2008 registered at Chalisgaon Police Station, Dist. Jalgaon for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of I.P.C. on 6th December, 2008.

2. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was arrested in connection with another crime and he was subsequently released on bail. It is further submitted that just to harass the applicant, he is shown as accused in different crimes. It is further submitted that the report of the auditor is the same. However, different crimes are registered. The action is malafide. It is further submitted that the applicant is heart patient. he is from rival political party. Therefore, police are harassing the applicant. In the complaint main allegations are against the directors. It is further submitted that the present applicant has deposited Rs.20 lacs in Crime No.216/2008. It is further submitted that at the most non depositing the amount would attract civil liability. It is further submitted that the alleged offence against the present applicant is only in respect of applying for loan to the Bank. It is further submitted that the Director Board and the Manager of the Bank failed to take necessary steps for recovery of the loan amount and for that, present applicant cannot be held responsible. It is further submitted that all documents are in the custody of the Bank. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is not at all required. It is further submitted that the present applicant is having roots in the society and permanent residence at Chalisgaon. He owns residential house at Chalisgaon and runs Uma Agency at Chalisgaon from years together. It is submitted that the civil remedies under Section 91 as well as 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act are open for the Bank for taking appropriate proceedings against the applicant for recovery of the amount of loan. Therefore, the learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the interim protection granted by this Court on 12.12.2008 may be made absolute.

3. The learnedAP.P. submitted that the present application is filed directly before this Court. The applicant should have filed application before the Sessions Court. There is no exceptional reason why the present applicant has filed application before this Court directly. It is further submitted that the offence in question is economic offence and registered under various sections of I.P.C. As it reveals from the complaint itself, the total depositors in the Bank are 23,504 and the Bank is supposed to pay them Rs.37 Crores 35 Lacs. The total loan amount which is to be recovered from the various directors and borrowers is Rs.27 Crores 16 lacs. Many irregularities and illegal disbursements have been disclosed in the complaint. Arrest is a part of the process of the investigation intended to secure several purposes and while in custody, there is possibility and circumstances in which the accused may give information leading to material facts.

4. It is further submitted that anticipatory bail may be refused to the applicant on the following grounds:

.a) A dishonest financial transactions have taken place. Undoubtedly, there is sufficient material to indicate that financial irregularities and dishonest and fraudulent loan transactions have taken place in the affairs of the said Bank, for which the board of directors and present borrower,who were in collusion with them are responsible. Requisite security was not obtained, without mortgage, without valuation report, title report, without verifying the stock, license of the shop, annual report of the shop, under the garb of loan amount was advanced to person residing outside the jurisdiction of the Bank. However, forged and fabricated record was created, the exposure limit was four lacs however, loan was sanctioned above four lacs. Fraudulently the fix depos