1609aba284.11.odt 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 284 OF 2011 (Ayonuddin Shamshuddin Solanki Vs. The State of Maharashtra) ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders .......................................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. A. A. Naik, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. C. N. Adgokar, A.P.P. for the non-applicant. CORAM : U. V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 16TH SEPT., 2011 Heard. The applicant, who apprehends his arrest in Crime No. 26/2011 registered at Police Station, Paarwa for offence punishable under Sections 166, 167, 177, 193, 466, 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), has filed the present application for pre-arrest bail. The allegation against the applicant is that he being Sarpanch of village Kurli, obtained the resolution register from the Secretary of the said Gram Panchayat and fabricated resolutions No.3/1 dated 28/2/1004 and 7/1 dated 18/8/2006 by adding some statements so as to involve Shri Jaiprakash Katpalliwar in an offence pertaining to the boys hostel which is operated in Gram Panchayat building at Kurli on rental basis. It is alleged that the applicant added some statements to show outstanding amount against said Jaiprakash who operates the said boys hostel. According to the applicant since he has complained about various irregularities committed in public works undertaken in the nearby area of Kurli village and has requested for enquiry and for criminal action against the 1609aba284.11.odt 2/3 culprits and further he has reported the matter to the superior officers and has even made allegations against the complainant Mr. Tukaram Gedam, Sub Divisional Officer, Pandharkawada, the present case has been registered against him by relying upon the statement of the rival contestant of the applicant in Gram Panchayat election namely Vilas Wadgulwar, who has been defeated. According to the applicant, a complaint has been filed out of political vengeance and that he is not involved in the crime. By way of reply, the respondent has narrated the facts of the complaint and has alleged that physical custody of the applicant is necessary to obtain his specimen handwriting and to obtain information as to how and where he has made the forgery to the said resolutions. As has been rightly pointed out by the learned Advocate Shri Naik, offence under Section 193 of I.P.C. could not have been added in view of Section 195 of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is seen that the offences under Sections 166, 167, 177, 469 and 471 are bailable offences and non- bailable offences are under Section 466 and 468 of I.P.C. It is seen that though the offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of the register pertaining to the Gram Panchayat, the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat has not lodged any complaint and it is the Sub Divisional Officer of Paarwa Police Station, who has taken personal interest in lodging the complaint against the applicant. The statement of one Shri Vilas Wadgulwar has been recorded by the police for corroboration. However, said Vilas Wadgulwar had contested the Gram Panchayat election against the applicant and was defeated. There is substance in the submission of the applicant that the complaint has been filed on account of political enmity between the applicant and Vilas Wadgulwar 1609aba284.11.odt 3/3 and since the applicant had made grievances against the complainant himself. Be that as it may, the presence of the applicant is required only for obtaining specimen handwriting of the applicant for which there is no need to detain him in custody. Appropriate conditions can be put for securing this purpose. In my view, no purpose will be served by detaining the applicant in custody. Hence, the application is allowed. In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime No. 26/2011 registered at Police Station Paarwa for offence punishable under Sections 166, 167, 177, 193, 466, 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant shall be released on execution of personal recognition bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount under the following conditions :- {i} The applicant shall attend Paarwa Police Station on 20/9/2011 between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. and shall cooperate with the investigation and shall give his specimen handwriting, if required, and thereafter shall attend Paarwa Police Station as and when called upon by the Investigating Officer, to do so. {ii} The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. {iii}The applicant shall not leave India without having prior permission of this Court. Steno-copy is allowed. Application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE wwl