1 ABA 169 OF 2011 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.169 OF 2011 Baban Kisan Tamhane .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. Rahul S. Kate, for the Applicant. Mrs. Y. M. Nakhawa, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 25rd February, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person who apprehends his arrest in the investigation ordered by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baramati on a complaint made by Mahavir Kasturchand Gandhi, who is now arraigned as Respondent No.2 in the Motor Accident Claim Application No.550B of 2000, pending before M.A.C.T. Baramati. The vehicle involved in the accident bearing registration No.MH-12/RA-1013, was owned by Mahavir Kasturchand Gandhi. It met with an accident on 27th August, 1998. The applicant had filed written statement in above claim application, stating that the vehicle was in fact owned by Mahavir Kasturchand Gandhi and not by him. Learned counsel for the applicant has made available copy of RC B bearing No.0033057 which is at page 60 of the compilation 2 ABA 169 OF 2011 which is issued on 7th November, 1998, shows with effect from 8th August, 1998 the present applicant Baban Tamhane is the owner No.2. Thus, the applicant's statement before M.A.C.T, Baramati that he was not owner of the vehicle on the day of accident which took place on 27th August, 1998, is not correct even as per documents produced by the applicant. In view of this the entire offence is made out on the documents which applicant himself had filed. Hence for this purpose, the applicant’s being in custody is not at all necessary. Therefore, in the event of applicant's in CR No.338 of 2010, registered at Baramati City Police Station, he be released on bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.25,000/- on the following conditions :- i) The applicant shall make himself available on 3rd Marc, 2011 at 10.00 a.m. for interrogation by Investigating Officer and thereafter as and when required Investigating Officer. ii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. 3 ABA 169 OF 2011 iv) The order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if chargesheeted the applicant may furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre -vs- State of Maharashtra and ors, in S.L.P No.7615 of 2009. v) The application stands disposed of. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)