(1) CRI.APP. 3839.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3839 OF 2010 Harshal Shantilal Kucheriya Age : 30 years, Occu.: Business, R/o Parvati Tower, Pipeline Road, District-Ahmednagar .. Applicant (Orig. Accused) VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station, Parner, District-Ahmednagar 2. Anita w/o Nandkumar Naik, Age : 38 years, Occu.: Household, R/o Jamgaon, Tq. Parner, Distrcit- Ahmednagar .. Respondents ... Mr. N.B. Narwade, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. V.D. Godbharle, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 26TH OCTOBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. This is an Application filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The applicant has been named as receiver of the stolen property. He seeks quashing of the FIR. The FIR purports to show that the respondent no.2 Anita, who is a married woman, suspected theft of gold ornament called "xaB.k" from the cupboard in her (2) CRI.APP. 3839.2010 house. The incident occurred on 15.12.2009. She made enquiry with her mother in law and gathered that one Sandhya Naik had been to her house in the noon time since no other person had been to her house at the relevant time, she suspected that the gold ornament was taken away by said Sandhya Naik. She enquired with Sandhya Naik and coaxed her. 3. Allegedly, Sandhya Naik confessed the guilt and assured that she would return the gold ornament. However, it was not returned and, therefore, FIR was filed. Consequent upon arrest of said Sandhya Naik, name of the applicant was revealed as the receiver of the said stolen ornament i.e. "xaB.k". 4. The learned Advocate for the applicant would submit that the applicant, by no stretch of imagination can be regarded as receiver of the stolen property, there could not be any dishonest intention available with him nor he could have any reasonable ground to suspect that the article was stolen. 5. The question of intention of the applicant will have to be determined after full-fledged (3) CRI.APP. 3839.2010 investigation/trial. In the context of criminal jurisprudence, concept of "intention" does imply "state of mind at the time of commission of any particular act." The intention can be gathered from the attending circumstances. At present, it will be premature to determine the intention of the applicant while purchasing the gold ornaments i.e. "xaB.k" from said Sandhya Naik. His Application for anticipatory bail has been already rejected. The investigation cannot be scuttled at the peremptory stage only because the applicant submits absence of criminal intention or dishonesty on his part. No substance. Criminal Application stands dismissed. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp