1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2617 OF 2010 Chandra Prakash Ramraj pal ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ......... Mr.Akshay Patil i/b.Mr.R.M.Azim, for applicant. Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP for respondent State. ......... CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J. (VACATION COURT) DATE : 26th MAY, 2010. P.C. : This application is for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant prays for anticipatory in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.I-151 of 2010 registered with Rabale Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 420, 471, 406, 408, 409 read with 34 Indian Penal Code. 2] Heard Mr.Akshay Patil, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.P.S.Hingorani, learned APP for the respondent State. 3] Mr.Patil submitted that no specific allegations are levelled against the applicant in RCC No.74 of 2010. He submitted that merely because it is alleged 2617-10.sxw 2 that the applicant was running an unauthorised school, that by itself will not make out any offence against the applicant. It is submitted that one Pravin Kumar Singh, cousin of complainant, has earlier lodged a complaint dated 24 th September, 2009 against the executive committee members of Jeevan Jyoti Education Society alleging misappropriation of funds and issuance of bogus leaving certificates by the schools managed by the said Society. After carrying out investigation in the said complaint, the Senior Police Inspector, Anti Extortion Cell, Crime Branch, Navi Mumbai, came to the conclusion that the complaint dated 24 th September, 2009 did not make out any case against the applicant. The Crime Branch further came to the conclusion that the school leaving certificates were not bogus, and therefore, no offence was committed. The said conclusion was arrived at relying upon the Government Resolution dated 17 th March, 2009. 4] As against this, Mr.Hingorani, learned APP submitted that the in RCC No. 74 of 2010 specific allegations are made against the applicant and other accused, that the accused in collusion and in connivance with each other, have forged, manipulated and fabricated the school leaving certificates, mark-sheets and educational records of the concerned school and students. The said complaint was filed on 22 nd January, 2010. Subsequently, the learned Magistrate passed order on 10 th March, 2010 directing the police to register FIR 2617-10.sxw 3 on the basis of complaint and submit report under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 5] Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Magistrate, statement of complainant was recorded on 18 th March, 2010. Perusal of the said statement, prima facie, discloses the involvement of the applicant. In my, opinion this is not a fit case for enlarging the applicant by granting anticipatory bail. No case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. 6] Hence, the Criminal Application is rejected. It is made clear that the observations made herein are only for the purpose of disposal of the anticipatory bail application and if an application for regular bail is filed by the applicant, the concerned Court will dispose of the said application in accordance with law and on the basis of material placed on record uninfluenced by this order. [R.G. KETKAR, J.] 2617-10.sxw