1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD ICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 95 /2010 [Damodar s/o Shamrao Kharikghare vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr R S Kurekar, Adv. for applicant Mr S B Ahirkar, APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : JANUARY 28, 2010. Heard. 2. The applicant had moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail when by order dated 4th September, 2009 in Criminal Application No.3124/2009, the Investigating Officer concerned was directed to give 48 hours' prior notice in writing in case it is intended to arrest the present applicant for accusations punishable u/s 468, 471, 420 read with section 34 IPC arising from Crime No.141/2009 reported at Sadar Police Station Nagpur. It appears that accordingly Shri R L Athawale, PSI of Sadar Police Station gave a notice dated 15.1.2010 to the applicant about the intended arrest. In order to dodge the arrest, the applicant moved an application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge XII Court, Nagpur, who, by order dated 11.8.2009 rejected the anticipatory bail application by a reasoned order, in Misc. Cri. Application No.1467/ 2009. 3. The accusations appears to be serious 2 inasmuch as it is alleged that the applicant had indulged in facilitating mutation entries in respect of property on record without vertification and enquiry which any reasonable and prudent public servant is expected to carry out in discharging his official duties. Complaint was lodged by one Gulabrao Tekade, another public servant, regarding the mutation entries effected, by which certain persons though alive were shown as dead and entries were effected by deleting their names and substituting their names by other names. When, how and why such mutation entries were effected and for which reason, is a matter of thorough investigation and investigation in such cases may not be fruitful to book the real culprits unless opportunity by way of custodial interrogation is received by the I.O. concerned. Therefore, I am not prepared to take a different view of the matter than that taken by learned Addl. Sessions Judge who rejected the prayer for bail. Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare