ABA650.22, etc.

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

18 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.650/2022

DHAIRYASHIL KESHAVRAO SURWASE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WITH

ABA/643 OF 2022

MANIK MADHAV MOTE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WITH

ABA/645/2022

ANIL BABURAO PAWAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WITH

ABA/649/2022

1. MEERA W/O SUNIL MOTE

2. ROHIDAS S/O HARIBHAU MOTE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WITH

ABA/693/2022

KAILAS TUKARAM GAIKWAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

ABA650.22, etc.

(2)

Mr. R.R. Karpe, Advocate for applicants in A.B.A. No.650/2022,

643/2022, 649/2022 & 645/2022;

Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for applicant in ABA No.693/2022

Ms. V.S. Choudhari, A.P.P. for respondent - State

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

DATE : 13^th June, 2022

P.C.

1.

The applicants in all these applications are the members of the

managing committee of Bhairavnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat

Sanstha Ltd., Wadala Bahiroba, Taluka Nevasa, District Ahmednagar,

registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative

Societies Act, 1960 (for short “the society”). It has been alleged

against them that they had invited depositors to deposit money with

the society with a promise that their amount would be returned with

interest. Believing in the promise made by the management of the

society, various depositors have deposited the amount in the said

society. However, when the deposits were matured, the money with

interest was not returned to the depositors. Time and again the

depositors made request to the management of the society to repay

their money with interest, but the management failed to repay the

money. Therefore, private complaints were filed before the learned

ABA650.22, etc.

(3)

Magistrate. The learned Magistrate was pleased to order an inquiry

under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and

thereafter the crimes have been registered against the applicants.

2.

It has been specifically submitted by the learned Counsel for

the applicants that for the same nature of allegations, the Directors

are facing number of first information reports as have been alleged

by the different depositors at different police stations. He would

point out that the audit of the society was done. In the audit report,

it has been revealed that there is no misappropriation of the funds but

there was mismanagement. He also added that the proceedings

under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act have

been initiated against the defaulters and the certificates have been

obtained and an inquiry under Section 88 of the said Act has also

been initiated against the management including the applicants and

action is likely to be commenced towards their personal property. The

personal property of the applicants is at stake, which may be attached

for the recovery of the amount to be paid to the depositors. He made

a statement that around Rs.40,00,000/- have been returned to the

different investors.

ABA650.22, etc.

(4)

3.

He would refer to the earlier orders passed by this Court in the

similarly situated cases and would submit that the protection was

granted to the employees of the Bank also. In the absence of any

misappropriation, there may not be a sufficient ground to the

Investigation to have the custodial interrogation of the applicants.

The applicants are from the respected families having no antecedents

at their discredit. The applicants are making every endeavour to

recover the loan advanced to the borrowers and to repay the amount

to the depositors. The applicants are not the beneficiaries of the

amount deposited by the depositors. The applicants are ready to

abide by the conditions if imposed while enlarging them on

anticipatory bail. He would submit