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. 1434 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1434 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1434 OF 2008 Mr Pandharinath Hashuram Patil ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr M. K. Kochrekar, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr S. R. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1385 of 2008 Mr Ashok Katod Gaikar .. Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr A. A. Jambotkar with K. Singh, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms P. P. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. DATED: 05.05.2008. DATED: 05.05.2008. DATED: 05.05.2008. P P P.C. C. C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. Perused the application and the material available on record. 3. The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail in C.R. No. 93 of 2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. registered at Manpada Police Station, Dombivilli, District Thane. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant in Criminal Application No. 1434 of 2008 (Pandharinath Vs. The State) submitted that the applicant has only identified executant of the sale deed who has received Rs.4.37 Crore. The present applicant was to receive Rs 4,00,000 by way of brokerage. He was middleman acting in the said transaction. 5. While considering application filed by the present applicant for anticipatory bail, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan was pleased to reject the same by making following observations. 10"Not only that but the papers of investigation show that there is involvement of both the applicants along with other accused in the said crime. The applicants in both bail applications had pursued the said transaction, they were personally present while the said transaction was taken place and they had taken the part of the said transaction." 11." It is true that the applicants in both bail applications have not received any amount as the payment of cheque Rs. 11 lacs has been stopped. However, it does not mean that merely because they have no any concern with the said transaction and with the said crime. There is evidence collected by the I.O. showing that a woman who has posed herself as Vidyaben Pandya was not a real Vidyaben Pandya and owner of the said land. Considering the evidence collected by the I.O. prima facie it reveals that the applicants were knowing that the said woman was not the owner of the land and she was not in fact Vidyaben Pandya, still then they introduced the said woman as the owner of the said land and taken the active part in the said transaction. It appears that since the registration of offence, both these applicants were absconding. It appears that the applicants are knowing the whereabouts of the said accused so called Vidyaben Pandya and involved in the crime and that amount has been disbursed from the bogus account. Therefore, in the above circumstances, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicants in both the applications is necessary." 6. Having seen the factual backdrop and observations made by the Trial Court, the involvement of the present applicants-accused; namely, Ashok and Pandharinath, prima facie, cannot be ruled out.Some of the accused persons are absconding. 7. In the above circumstances, at the initial stage of the investigation, it would not be in the interest of justice to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail. The amount involved is running into more than four crores. The complaint needs thorough investigation. 8. In the result, the present application stands rejected. 9. At this stage, both the applicants seek time to surrender. One week’s time is granted to surrender. 10. Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J)