THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11920 OF 2010 ORDER Petitioner herein is A1 in CC.No.103 of 2010 on the file of First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijaywada. The accusation levelled against the petitioner is that he fabricated solvency certificates and produced the same before the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. The leaned III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate referred the solvency certificates for verification and the verification reveals that solvency certificates produced by the petitioner are fabricated. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent- State. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the solvency certificates produced by the petitioner are issued by the competent authority and therefore, the petitioner deserves for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that the solvency certificates are found to be fabricated. I have gone though the complaint filed under Section 340 read with Section 195 (1) (b) of Cr.P.C. At paragraph No.2 of the complaint, it is stated as hereunder: “It is also to be stated that the Sub Inspector of Police, Governorpet Crime P.S., Vijayawada City filed verification report on 8-6-2009 stating that on enquiry and verification it revealed that the solvency certificate of B.Ramachandra rao (A1 herein) who stood surety for all the accused (A3 to A6) herein is not issued by the Department of Deputy Executive Information Engineer, Vijayawada and the signature, rubber stamp found on the salary certificate of B.Ramachandra Rao is not that of Smt P.Raja Kumari, who is the Deputy Executive Information Engineer, Vijayawada in the information and Public Relation Department, Vijayawada. Therefore, the said salary certificate has been fabricated by forging the signature of said authority with fake rubber stamp and accordingly, the said P.Raja Kumari issued a report enclosed to the report dated 5.6.2009 of the Sub Inspector of Police.” Since the verification revealed that the petitioner fabricated the solvency certificates, he does not deserve for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to surrender himself before the concerned Court and renew his request for grant of bail. ____________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J rkk Dated: 10-12-2010