FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3753 OF 2011 SHAIKH JAKIRHUSAIN IMAM VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... Advocate for Petitioner(s) : Mr. Wani Girish V. APP for Respondent(s): Mr. D.R.Korde. Adv. Mr. Pp Chavan For Assist To Pp ... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. Dated: September 16, 2011 ... 1. Perused investigation papers, which were made available for the inspection purpose, as well as heard learned respective counsel for the parties, finally. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant namely Shaikh Jakirhusain Imam, seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest under Crime No.224/2011, registered at Zilapeth Police Station, Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under sections 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114, 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that crime has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant namely Chandrashekhar Prakash Attarade on 29.7.2011. It is alleged therein that the said complainant purchased some land bearing gat no.78 (1) (b) admeasuring 2 H 61 Aar at Bhusawal for the FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders consideration of Rs. Two Crores Ten Lacs, with a view to prepare lay out thereof and obtain NA permission and prepare a scheme for bungalow thereon. Accordingly, he submitted that plan for sanction of lay out with the Municipal Council, Bhusawal on 17.3.2011. However, since the said permission was not granted for the substantial period, he met the present applicant, who was concerned Engineer of the said Municipal Council and was concerned with the sanction of his lay out plan, and asked him about the sanction of lay out. Thereupon, the applicant informed him that his work could not be done unless he had met to Santosh Choudhary i.e. accused No.1. Hence, the complainant asked the applicant that why he was required to meet the Santosh Choudhary. There upon the applicant stated that unless accused No.1 Santosh gives green signal, no file in Municipal Council Bhusawal is processed and if the complainant did not meet accused No.1 Santosh Choudhary, permission for lay out would not be granted and accused No.1 Santosh would impose some reservation on the said land. 4. On the aforesaid allegations, learned counsel for the applicant canvassed that applicant was on leave during the relevant period i.e. from 16.4.2011 to 20.4.2011. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that alleged payment was made to accused No.1 Santosh Chaudhary and FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders not to the applicant herein and therefore, nothing is to be recovered from the applicant. It is further submitted that record is with the Municipal Council and applicant is not having any record and therefore, the applicant deserves grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned APP Mr. Korde and Mr. Chavan learned counsel for the complainant countered the said argument and opposed present application vehemently and submitted that after arrest of accused No.1 Santosh, about 77 files were recovered from his possession at his residence. It is also canvassed that illegal amount of Rs.60 lacs was fixed to be paid to accused No.1 Santosh, and out of the said amount, amount of Rs.25 lacs was paid to him and during the course of the investigation amount of Rs.15 lacs has been recovered, but amount of Rs.10 lacs which was said to be the share of the applicant as ransom, is yet to be recovered. It is also asserted by learned APP and learned counsel for the complainant that there is systematic conspiracy between the applicant and other co-accused persons to extract money from the persons like the complainant, and therefore, it is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is essential. It is also pointed out that two Crimes are pending against the applicant bearing Crime No.210/2011 registered with Bazarpeth Police Station, Bhusawal and Crime No.53/2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders with the same police station. In the said context, learned counsel Mr. Wani for applicant submitted that Crime No. 53/2011 pertains to matter of demolition. 6. After considering the rival submissions, at the outset name of the applicant herein has been reflected in the contents of the First Information Report and specific role has been attributed to him therein that although he was concerned Engineer, he asked the complainant to meet accused No.1 Santosh Choudhary, for sanction of complainant’s file of lay out and insisted upon the complainant to meet accused No.1, stating that ‘unless Santosh Choudhary gives green signal, no file in Municipal Council, Bhusawal is processed, and if, the complainant did not meet with accused no.1 Santosh, permission for lay out would not be granted and accused No.1 Santosh would impose some reservation on the said land. Hence, considering the said very contents of the complaint, apparently, there is no false implication of the applicant in the present crime. 7. Moreover, during the course of the investigation, it is revealed that the illegal amount of Rs.60 lacs was fixed to be paid to accused No.1 by the complainant, out of which Rs.25 lacs were paid to him and out of that Rs.15 lacs has been recovered. As regards balance amount of Rs.10 lacs, it is FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders submitted that, said amount is stated to be the share of the applicant in the aforesaid ransom, which is yet to be recovered, and therefore, it is urged that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for recovery of the said amount and to unearth the other details of the crime. Besides, it cannot be overlooked that 77 files were recovered from the possession of from residence of accused No.1 Santosh at his residence. 8. Moreover, it also cannot be ignored that two crimes are pending against the applicant and although, out of that crime No.53/2011 pertained to the matter of demolition, but fact remains that both the said crimes are pending against the applicant. 9. Besides although the learned counsel Mr. Wani canvassed that applicant was on leave between 16.4.2011 to 20.4.2011 but no documentary record has been produced to substantiate said contention. 10. Having comprehensive view of the matter, and considering the accusations made against the applicant and nature and gravity thereof, there is primafacie material against the applicant and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for further progress in the FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders investigation in proper perspective. Hence, present application deserves to be rejected. 11. In the result, present application lacks merit and therefore, stands dismissed and disposed of finally. 12. The above observations are the primafacie in nature, same may not be used in any other matter, being decided on merits. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. ) aaa/- ***