1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2349 OF 2010 1. Gulab Mohd Khan S/o.Akbar Khan, Age-66 years, Occu-Business, 2. Amjad Khan S/o.Gulam Mohd. Khan, Age-32 years, Occu-Business, Both are R/o.Aref Colony, Aurangabad. 3. Ab Rashid S/o.Ab Aziz, Age-69 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Kohinoor Colony, Aurangabad. 4. Ab Khalid S/o. Ab Rashid, Age-32 years, Occu-Business, R/o. as above APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station, Mukundwadi, Aurangabad RESPONDENT Mr.K.G.Bhosale h/f. Mr.R.V.Gore, learned counsel for applicants. Mrs.V.A.Shinde, learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 06/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached 2 this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.116/2010, registered in Mukundwadi Police Station. Aurangabad 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Suresh Laxman to whom with the agreement of sale was executed by Power of Attorney Holders of applicant no.2 and 3 named as Balaji and Vijay. The consideration amount of said transaction was Rs.30,50,000/-. This Power of Attorney was executed in favour of this Vijay and Balaji by applicant no. 2 and 3 on 29/03/2007. There are allegations that out of this consideration amount, the power of attorney holders have accepted an amount of Rs.12,50,000/- and the remaining amount require to be paid at the time of registration of the final conveyance. It appears that on 10/02/2009, these applicant no.2 and 3 have withdrawn the power given in favour of these Vijay and Balaji. To that effect, they have made a paper publication. As these power of attorney holders have not completed the transaction, the complainant approached to them either to complete the transaction or to repay the amount. At that time, the power of attorney holders informed that now their power is removed by the original owners and demanded Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant and further assured that they will complete the transaction and also informed the complainant to pay the balance 3 amount of Rs.18,00,000/- to these power of attorney holders, which in turn they will pay to the original owners. Neither the transaction was completed nor the amount was repaid by these power of attorney holders, hence the said offence came to be registered. 4. It appears that those power of attorney holders have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail. It appears that the said application came to be rejected by another bench vide order dated 17/05/2010 and the police started inquiry with these applicants about the said transaction, and hence these applicants have approached this Court for their pre-arrest bail. 5. During the submissions across the bar, one document was placed in my hand by the learned APP that even though the power was revoked in Feb.2009, again applicant no.2 and 3 have entered into the transaction with Vijay and Balaji vide an agreement dated 17/04/2010. This fact was suppressed by these applicants in their application and by suppressing these facts, they have approached this Court for their pre-arrest bail. Considering the aspect, as the way and manner, the documents are prepared and not only the complainant, but others are cheated and tempted to purchase the landed property at the hands of power of attorney holders by applicant no.2 and 3, it appears that this is a racket in which applicant no.2 and 3 are also involved alongwith their power of attorney holders. Hence their custodial interrogation is necessary as huge amount is collected by them not only from the complainant, but 4 by others also. At the same time, on perusal of the papers of investigation, nothing incriminating material is revealed against applicant no.1 and 4. Hence order. O R D E R 1. Application is partly allowed. 2. Application of applicant no.2 and 3 is hereby rejected. 3. Application in respect of applicant no.1 and 4 is hereby allowed. In the event of arrest of applicant no.1 and 4 in connection with CR No.116/2010, registered in Mukundwadi Police Station, they be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 4. After their release, applicant no.1 and 4 to give attendance to Mukundwadi Police Station, if required on written intimation by the Investigation Officer concerned. 5. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri.appl.2349-10