( 1 ) cria4290.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4290 OF 2011 Dhanaji @ Dhanraj s/o. Nivrati Khatke .. Applicant Age. 24 years, Occ. Agri., R/o. Devarjan, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. S.V. Warad h/f. Mr. Pratap Rodge, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. B.V. Wagh, A.P.P. for respondent/State. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 11.11.2011 P.C. :- 1. The applicant apprehends arrest in Crime No. 3012 of 2011 of Udgir (Rural) Police Station, Dist. Latur. According to the F.I.R. bribe amount was demanded from Deelip Ghavane in connection with management of Mahatma Phule Vidya Mandir and the demand was to see that salaries are drawn from time to time. A trap was arranged and as per the trap which turned down to be successful, a sum of Rs. 2000/- was handed over to the ( 2 ) cria4290.11 Vice Principal of the School. In the trap panchanama as well as in the F.I.R., there is specific reference that said amount was thereafter transferred to one person, by name, Dhanaji Khatke. Learned advocate for the applicant contended that addition of name of present applicant in the F.I.R. is an improvement in as much as in the report submitted at first instance involvement of present applicant is not made out. He also submitted that on the relevant date when the trap was led and completed, he was in public hospital and therefore it is improbable that he would be the person at the time when the trap was concluded and it will be improbable that the money would be handed over to him by the Vice President. 2. On the last occasion directions were given to learned A.P.P. to ascertain whether on the relevant date the applicant was admitted in the hospital. Insofar as that aspect is concerned, learned A.P.P. has produced statement of Dr. Sanjay Pawar, who is said to have ( 3 ) cria4290.11 rendered statement to the Police that the applicant had compelled said Dr. Pawar to prepare entries to show that he was in the public hospital. 3. After having perused this record, two points are against present applicant. The trap panchanama clearly mentions that the amount of Rs. 2000/- was handed over to the applicant soon after it was received by the Vice Principal and the present applicant happens to be brother of the Secretary of the institution. The word of present applicant that he was in public hospital and therefore his presence at the trap scene is doubtful falls to ground on account of statement of Dr.Pawar, which indicated that he was compelled to prepare bogus record as regards admission of present applicant in the public hospital. The trap panchanama shows that the bribe amount is paid immediately to the applicant which was received by the Vice Principal and the applicant happens to be brother of the Secretary, these facts met to hold ( 4 ) cria4290.11 that custodial interrogation of the present applicant is required in order to fix role of the applicant. In view of above, I am inclined to reject the anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, the following order is passed :- 4. The Criminal Application stands rejected. [R.Y. GANOO, J.] snk/2011/NOV11/cria4290.11