GANPAT BAPU SALUNKHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein are convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 r/w. Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code and under sections 255 to 257 and section 259 and 260 of Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment on counts for the charge of sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 r/w. Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, Rs.20,000/-, Rs.25,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively on each counts, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months, six months, fifteen days respectively on each counts by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 249 of 2007 @ 678 of 2007 @ 916 of 2007 @ 102 of 2008 @ 711 of 2008 @ 347 of 2009 vide Judgment and Order dated 3rd April 2013. Hence, these Appeals.

(2.) Such of the facts necessary for the decision of these appeals are as follows:-

(3.) Mumbai District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. had floated a scheme of housing loan in the year 2002 in order to enable the people from lower middle class to have a house of their own. In the year May, 2003 bank had received application forms from several persons seeking housing loan, more particularly in the scheme of Vikrant builders which was being developed by one Ganpat Salunkhe, original accused No. 4. The borrowers in the present case, more particularly, accused No. 1,3,6,7 and 9 were sanctioned loan upto July, 2003. The loan was to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- to 4,50,000/-as per the procedure contemplated. The initial part payment was made by borrowers and the pay orders and cheques were drawn in the name of the builder i.e. Mahalaxmi Enterprises. At one point of time, it was noticed that the borrowers had discontinued paying installments after paying initial installments. Therefore, notices were issued to the said borrowers. However, there was no response to the notice and therefore, the bank found it necessary to enquire into the said case.