SADASHIV AMBADAS GAIKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner, invoking remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India preferred the present Writ Petition seeking following reliefs -

(3.) It has been contended that the petitioner lodged the First Information Report bearing Crime No. I-571 of 2017 registered under Section 406, 409, 420, 463, 468, 471, 120-B of Indian Penal Code with Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad. The petitioner cast allegations that the Managing Committee and the officers of the District Central Co-operative Bank, Aurangabad, i.e. Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members of the Board of Director including Executive Director in connivance with the Chartered Accountant and Officers of the Bank, illegally written off the amount of loan of Rs.8,52,01,862/- (Rs. Eight Crores Fifty Two Lakhs One Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Two Only) disbursed in favour of more than 52 Co-operative Societies in Aurangabad District. It has been alleged that the members of the Manging Committee and others during the period from year 2011 to 2014 shown the recovery of loan amount from the borrower - Cooperative Societies by fabricating the documents as well as by showing the recovery through book adjustment. There were no endeavour to recover the loan and without following due procedure, the Managing Committee of the Bank proceeded to write off the loan disbursed to the Co-operative Societies. According to first-informant, all these cooperative societies were floated by the members of Board of Directors of the Bank themselves or their kith and kins. The first-informant also raised the doubt about genuineness of audit report obtained by the bank, in connivance with the Chartered Accountant and others. It has been contended that when there was no actual recovery of loan amount, but it was shown by making book adjustment, in such circumstance, the audit report looses its significance. There were allegations of fraud, mischief and misappropriation of public funds, etc. which caused heavy loss to the bank authorities.