1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No 2512 of 2009 Ganesh and ors v. State of Maharashtra -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr S.G. Karmarkar, Adv for applicants Ms S.S. Wandile, APP for State Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 13th August 2009 1. Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No. 65/2009 registered with Police Station, Khaparkheda under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. One Lalaram Kushwah lodged report with Police Station, Khaparkheda that on 3.5.2009, applicants halted his trailer near Kamptee and asked him to turn back. Applicant Ganesh sat with him in the trailer and the vehicle was stopped at Fouzi Dhaba on Mansar Road and removed the goods in the trailer. Complainant was made to leave under threat. He lodged report of incident to Police Station, Kamptee after intimating owner of trailer and since Kamptee Police Station asked him on 26.5.2009 to report the matter to Khaparkheda P.S., he made report to that Police Station on 27.5.2009. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that there is inordinate delay of about 23 days in lodging report. Learned counsel for 2 the applicant contended that one Kake Sardar is the real culprit who has misappropriated mangenese slag worth Rs. 7 lacs. Applicants were in fact the owner of consignment and for transportation thereof to Ramgarh they had paid advance to owner of trailer. When the party did not receive material, they made enquiries and learnt that the trailer with goods was parked by Kake Sardar at Tatibandh (Raipur, Chhatisgarh). On contacting Kake Sardar, he started demanding charges at the rate of Rs. 1200/- per tonne and turned down the request of applicants to unload the goods at Chapa. According to learned counsel for applicants, it was Kake Sardar who then misappropriated the entire material at Raipur and thereby applicants have suffered huge loss. Learned counsel contended that report of the incident was lodged by them to Police Station, Kanhan, but the police refused to take any cognizance. 4. Learned APP while opposing bail application contended that associate of the applicants viz. Santosh is absconding and his whereabouts are not known. Moreover, consignment is still to be recovered and since the investigation is presently at initial stage, custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary. She prayed for rejection of the application. 5. Considering the fact that there is delay of about 23 days in lodging FIR for no justifiable reason, prima facie involvement of the applicants is doubtful. It is not disputed by learned APP that consignment was given for loading and transportation by applicants themselves and they were owner of that consignment. It has also been pointed out by applicants that they have lodged report against Sardar Kake for misappropriation of their consignment. Taking into consideration all these important aspects, this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the 3 applicants. 6. Interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants vide order dated 6th July 2009 is hereby confirmed. Applicants shall attend Investigating Officer as and when called, and initially between 11.00 am and 02.00 pm for fifteen days. Applicants shall not misuse liberty and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner. Applicants shall leave their permanent address and telephone/cell phone numbers with Investigation Officer. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Judge. hsj