{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1294 OF 2010 1. Fahim Akhtar s/o Mohd. Gaus Age-58 years, Occ-Service R/o Aurangabad Times Colony, Aurangabad 2. Iqbal Saleem s/o Mohd.Gaus Age-52 years, Occ-Service R/o As above 3. Mohd. Waseem Ahmad s/o Alim Ahmad Age-28 years, Occ-Business R/o Sadaf Colony, Aurangabad 4. Azizoddin s/o Zahiruddin Age-23 years, Occ-Business, R/o Roshangate, Aurangabad APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad RESPONDENTS ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicants Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 16th June 2010 {2} PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicants have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.37/2010 registered with City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad for an offence punishable u/s 420, 406, 504, 506, 34, 120, 467, 471, 447 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. It appears that interim protection is granted to the applicants by this Court vide order dated 6th April 2010. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by the learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation carried out till today. 4. It appears that the said offence is registered on the complaint of one Vimal Daulatrao More, who happens to be the wife of ex-Assistant Commissioner of Police. It is alleged that at the material she was serving at Ellora. Perusal of the compliant indicates that she had entered into an agreement of sale of the property situated at gut No.223 at Ohor, Dist-Aurangabad, however, inspite of the fact that said agreement to sale was in existence, the property was sold by the owner Ramlal in favour of applicants No.3 and 4 and the applicants No.1 and 2, who are working in the office of DILR, Aurangabad, have helped for the said {3} transaction. 5. Considering the nature of allegations made in the complaint, it appears that in breach of the agreement to sale, the original owner has sold the property for which he had already entered into an agreement to sale with the complainant. The transaction for which the present complaint is lodged is purely of a civil nature and proper remedy to redress the grievance of the applicant is to approach civil court and not to file a criminal case. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in exercise of extra ordinary discretion vested in this Court. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. Interim protection granted on 06.04.2010 is hereby confirmed and the same to remain in force till filing of the charge sheet. The applicants are directed to cooperate the investigating agency and to attend the concerned police station whenever required by the IO, on written requisition. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1294-10