Ladda 1 aba-121-11.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 121 of 2011 Abdul Sattar Salat ...Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 74 of 2011. IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 121 of 2011 Abdul Sattar Salat ...Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. Merchant Saleh Mohammad Abdul Sattar. ...Intervener. Mr Amin Solkar, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr Sachin Dhakephalkar, Advocate for the Intervener. CORAM: A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED:- 31st March, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions at length on this application for anticipatory bail preferred by the applicant apprehending his arrest in Ladda 2 aba-121-11.doc the matter of C.R.No.283 of 2010 registered with Vinobha Bhave Nagar Police Station, registered on 25th December, 2010. Offences alleged against the present applicant and other co-accused i.e. his son and other relatives are punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 448, 420 read with section 34 of I.P.C. Also heard submissions on behalf of the Intervener-original complainant Sale Mohammad Abdul Sattar Merchant. 2. According to the complainant, he had given various amounts, in lakhs, for purchase of the residential accommodation at Mumbai and had asked his brother and his cousin brother i.e. the present applicant, to deal with the prospective owners of the flats. Accordingly, in the year 2005 a room was purchased in Akashganga Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and agreement was entered into, including power of attorney, sale deed, etc. However, when subsequently during the years from 2006, 2009 and 2010 when the original complainant – Intervener came down to India and enquired regarding his room, he was told that the room, which was earlier allegedly purchased by the present applicant, was in fact belonged to the present applicant. In the meantime, it is also averred in the F.I.R. that somewhere in the year 2006 or so when the complainant along with his wife had been to India, the present applicant had requested him to accompany him and his Ladda 3 aba-121-11.doc family members in the said room which was earlier purchased out of the funds given by the complainant. Such request was acceded by the complainant and as such present applicant and his family members started residing in the said room. 3. During the arguments, learned counsel for the present applicant, produced a list of documents, mainly showing his physical possession over the room in the said Akashganga Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and further stated that the xerox copies of the said documents were handed over to the Investigating Agency. This fact is confirmed by the learned A.P.P. on instructions from the I.O. However, attention of this Court is drawn towards the statement of the original owner of the said room i.e.one Smt Noorjahan so also the attention of this Court is drawn towards statement of Secretary of Akashganga Co-operative Housing Society one Mr Londhe. It appears that from their statements there is no any sale deed or any understanding or any no objection certificate given by the Society or any right transferred in the name of the present applicant by the original vendor. In that view of the matter and considering the documents produced by the applicant showing only the possession except the sale deed, in the opinion of this Court, it is not a case in which discretionary relief can be given in favour of the applicant. Moreover, attention of this Court is drawn towards the contents of the Ladda 4 aba-121-11.doc alleged sale deed entered into between said original vendor Noorjahan and present applicant Abdul Sattar. In para No.1, it is specifically mentioned that an amount of Rs.5 lakhs have been paid to Smt Noorjahan vide cheque No.505676, drawn on Union Bank of India, being full and final consideration amount in respect of the said room. After pointing out this averment in the alleged sale deed by which the present applicant claims to be the owner of the room, attention of this Court is drawn towards the entry in the statement of the account of the original complainant-intervener. The same cheque No. 505676 is shown in the said account with Union Bank of India and in the specific account number, concerning the account of original complainant intervener. Said cheque is shown under the column withdrawal and the cheque is drawn in favour of Noorjahan Ansari and date is 25th August, 2005. This revelation still confirms that it is not a case in which the discretionary relief can be granted in favour of the applicant. Hence, Criminal Application No. 121 of 2011 stands rejected. Interim relief, if any, earlier granted stands vacated. 4. In view of rejection of anticipatory bail application, Application No. 74 of 2011 filed by the Intervener-complainant is disposed of accordingly. (A.R.JOSHI, J.)