1. All these applications can be conveniently disposed of by this common order, as the applicants in all these applications are the same and though the respondent No.2 in these applications are different, the facts are identical and the questions, needing determination are also the same.

2. The applicants, in all these applications, are the office bearers and officers of the Savada Merchant Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Savada, Tq. Raver, Dist. Jalgaon (hereinafter referred to as the 'said society'). On separate complaints against them, filed by different persons, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 409 of I.P.C. r.w. section 34 of I.P.C., the J.M.F.C., Amalner, has issued process against the applicants, in all these cases, requiring them to answer to the charge of an offence punishable under Section 409 of I.P.C. r.w. section 34 of I.P.C.

3. The substance of all these complaints is as follows. That, the respective complaints were induced by the applicants to invest the monies in the said society on the assurance that they would be given good interest and other facilities. The complainants, in separate incidents, were assured that after the period would be over, the entire amount invested by them with the said society, would be repaid to the respective complainants, with interest. That, the respective complainants placed trust in the applicants and kept various amounts in fixed deposits for different periods with the said society. However, after the period of the fixed deposit was over, the society did not pay back the amounts, kept by the respective complainants, to them. That, the matter was taken by the respective complainants to the Consumer Forum where also the complainants have succeeded; but, still the applicants have not given their amounts back.

4. In my opinion, no offence is, prima facie, disclosed from any of the complaints.

5. The whole basis of the complaints is that trusting the office bearers of the said society, the respective complainants invested their monies with the society, by keeping them in fixed deposits for certain terms. That, after the term was over, monies were not repaid to the complainants. It is on the basis of that specific averment, the applicants, who are said to be responsible for the act of the said credit society, are alleged to have committed criminal breach of trust.

6. It is well settled, that money deposited by the customer in a Bank or Credit Society does not amount to 'entrustment' of the money with the Bank/Credit Society. It is well settled that the relationship between such person and the Banker would be of debtor and creditor. The money so deposited, even if it is termed as a 'fixed deposit', does not remain property of the person who deposits the money; but, it becomes part of the funds of the Bank/Credit Society. The Bank/Credit Society is supposed to and, in fact, authorized to, use it for their own business. Thus, the concept of 'entrustment' cannot be introduced at all, when such money is kept in the Bank/Credit Society with the understanding that the same would be repaid after certain term with a certain rate of interest.

7. As a matter of fact, the person depositing such amounts with a Bank/Credit Society and hoping to get interest, is always well aware that the Bank/Credit Society would be investing the money for their business i.e. for disbursing loans to others or any other business, which such Bank/Credit Society would be interested in carrying on. Otherwise, such person would never expect to get interest from the Bank over the amounts invested by him. It is, therefore, more than clear that the concept of 'entrustment' of money cannot be brought into, with reference to the monies deposited with the Bank/Credit Society which are, as per the contract between such person and the Bank/Credit Society, required to be repaid after a certain period along with a certain rate of interest.

8. The learned Counsel for the complainants submitte