1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.720 OF 2011 1 Mr. Dhanji Gela Patel 2 Mr. Damji Narayan Patel ...Applicants. v/s The State ...Respondent. Mr. A.M.Saraogi,adv. For the Applicants. Ms P.P.Shinde ,APP For the Respondent/State. Ms Hemangi Prabhu, adv. For the Intervener present in Court. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA,J. DATED : AUGUST 23,2011. P.C. 1 Applicants seek anticipatory bail in crime no.181 of 2011 registered at MHB Colony police station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, 454, 457, 380 r/w section 34 of the I.P.C. registered at the report of one Jayantibhai Patel on 6.8.2011. 2 It appears that the complainant Jayantibhai is the owner of shop nos.13 and 14 in the building of BSES Friends Co-operative Hsg. Society, Link Road, Gorai-3, Boriwali (West. These shops were allotted to the complainant by the MHADA as it is the building of MHADA. On 26.4.2007 complainant 2 entered into agreement for sale of both these shops in favour of the applicants. Shop No.13 was to be sold at Rs.24,85,000/- and shop no.14 was to be sold at Rs.32,23,500/-. At the time of registration of agreement for sale, complainant received an amount of Rs.8 lac on account of earnest money out of the consideration amount at the rate of Rs.4 lakh for each shop. Balance amount was to be paid later on and possession was to be given. According to the complainant, he received an amount of Rs.24,54,250/- by two cheques. That amount covered full price of the shop no.13 and the excess amount of Rs. 3,69,250/- was appropriated towards the price of shop no.14. Thus, there is no dispute about shop no. 13. However, according to the complainant without making balance payment of the consideration of shop no.14, accused/applicants got the shop transferred in their name in the records of MHADA. In the year 2009, complainant offered to pay maintenance amount regarding the shop no.14 but maintenance receipt was not issued to him on the ground that the shop no.14 was already transferred in the name of the 3 applicants. Thereafter, he had some correspondence with the society, MHADA and finally on 6.8.2011, he lodged the report in the police station. 3 According to the applicants, out of the two cheques, one cheque was pertaining shop no.13 and another cheque was pertaining shop no.14 and the balance amount was paid in cash for which they have obtained receipt showing the payments. It appears that after the report was lodged, police sealed shop no.14 and handed over keys of the shop to the complainant and thus effective possession of the shop no.14 is with the complainant. The learned counsel for the applicants makes a statement that the applicants propose to file suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act very soon for taking back possession of the shop no.14. 4 In view of the facts and circumstances noted above, it appears to be a civil dispute between the parties. Even if there is substance in the contention of the complainant that the payment was not made and the applicants have wrongly got the shop no.14 transferred in their names still report 4 itself is lodged about two years after the fact was disclosed to the complainant and for such dispute, custodial interrogation is absolutely not necessary. 5 Therefore, in the event of arrest in crime no.181 of 2011 registered at MHB Colony police station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, 454, 457, 380 r/w section 34 of the I.P.C., applicants be released on PR of Rs.15,000/- each with one surety in the like amount with the condition that they shall make themselves available before the police for the purpose of interrogation and shall fully co-operate investigation by producing documents required by the police and by giving specimen handwriting, signatures, etc. They shall not misuse bail. 6 Application stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)