IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3388 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3388 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3388 OF 2007 Mr.Vikas Paralkar s/o. Balwant Paralkar ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.J.a. Udaipuri i/b. M/s.Udaipuri & Co. for the Applicant. Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. Mr.Ganesh K. Gole for Respondent No.2. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : MARCH 12, 2009 DATED : MARCH 12, 2009 DATED : MARCH 12, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the applicant and APP for the State. 2. This is an application for cancellation of anticipatory bail. The allegation in the complaint is that the accused who is a Recovery Agent had forcibly taken possession of the motor cycle which was purchased by the applicant by taking loan from the financial institution. It is alleged that alongwith vehicle, an amount of Rs.2 lakhs which was in the car of the applicant was also taken away. - 2 - 3. It is submitted that the Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of financial institution in recovering possession of such vehicle in such manner. It is, therefore, submitted that the Sessions Court ought not to have granted anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. In my view, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Sessions Court. The order was passed on 29th June, 2007, almost two years have passed from the date of the said order. It is not alleged that the condition imposed by the Sessions Court has been violated by the respondent. Hence, no case is made out for interfering with the order passed by the Sessions Court. 5. Application for cancellation of anticipatory bail is rejected. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)