All the seven accused, including one woman, are directors of Mauli Steel and Alloys Limited. They have been accused of stealing power worth over Rs 3.5 crore.

The accused were granted bail on condition that they would together deposit Rs 30 lakh with the court within the next 15 days. In all, there are 23 accused in the case.

While four accused were granted bail earlier, the applications of the others will come up for hearing before the specially designated court of Justice R G Deshpande on Wednesday.

All 23 accused have been charged under Section 379 (theft), 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1986.

When the hearing began in court in the post-afternoon session today, Justice Deshpande, who is currently hearingcivil matters, was curious to know why the `criminal cases' had come before him instead of the regular criminal bench, being presided over by Justice S S Dani. S R Barlinge, defence counsel appearing on behalf of two directors of Rishi Steel and Alloys Limited, submitted that since Justice Deshpande had heard the very first cases in this connection and also passed an order in it, the rest of the cases too may have been referred to him.

However, Santosh Bora, representing the seven directors of Mauli Steel, differed and went on give a detailed account of the circumstances which led to the cases being posted on the justice's board.

Bora said the first case had actually been part-heard by Justice Dani. At a particular juncture, Justice Dani had inquired from Barlinge, who was appearing for the accused in that case, whether his clients would agree to deposit Rs 1 crore as bail with the court. However, Barlinge had sought an adjournment, saying he would take instruction from his clients. The matter was thusposted for hearing on the following day.

``However on the next day, Justice Dani happened to go on leave and since the matter was already put on board it came up before Justice Deshpande. The case was heard and the bench also granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner on a deposit of Rs 1.5 lakh.

``On the following working day of the court, when Justice Dani returned from leave and resumed hearing of the bunch of anticipatory bail applications, he learnt that the case he had part-heard had been put before another bench which also passed an order.

When Justice Dani learnt that the bail deposit settled was just Rs 1.5 lakh and not Rs 1 crore, he was upset and declared that he would not hear any of the cases. Justice Dani was also not happy at the fact that a case adjourned on the count that the defence counsel needed to take instructions from his client, was actually put before another court and was decided, Bora explained to the court.

On hearing Bora's explanation, Justice Dani called chiefgovernment prosecutor, Anandbhushan Kanade, to inquire what bail amount he had insisted on. Kanade said he had submitted that the deposit be at least 75 per cent of the amount of the power theft. However, Bora told the court that none of the counsels had given any specific figure before Justice Deshpande.

While Kanade and Barlinge objected to this, Justice Deshpande, who had heard the bail application, remarked that Bora was right.

Justifying to the court the reasons why he choose to ``put the record straight before the court,'' Bora said this was a must in the interest of administration of justice so that it does not reflect badly upon the court.

The remaining bail applications will be heard tomorrow. The seven accused, directors of Mauli Steel and Alloys Limited, granted bail today are: Santosh Mundada (25); Dwarkaprasad Soni; Sanjay Rathi (32); Shivratan Mundada (32); Rameshwar Loya (45); Purushottam Toshniwal (32); and Saroj Rathi (45).