IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2009 Amit Himanshu Sinha ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.Rajeev Patil, Sr.Counsel i/b. Mr.Sachin S. Pande for the Applicant. Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JANUARY 21, 2009 DATED : JANUARY 21, 2009 DATED : JANUARY 21, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the applicant and APP for the State. 2. This is an application for anticipatory bail. A complaint has been lodged by the officers of Punjab National Bank that the original documents which were tendered to the Bank for the purpose of securing loan given by the bank by depositing the original Title Deeds were later on forged and used by the applicant for obtaining loan from another bank. 3. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the State in which it is stated that the applicant had forged - 2 - original documents and on the basis of this forged documents, loan had been obtained from more than one bank. In the affidavit-in-reply, chart has been annexed at Exhibit-A wherein the list of properties of the applicant have been mentioned and the details of the loan which he had taken from various banks also has been given. It is alleged that the modus operandi of the applicant was to use forged original documents and on the basis of these forged documents, an equitable mortgage was executed in favour of more than one bank and loan was obtained. 4. Shri Rajiv Patil, the learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submitted that so far as Punjab National Bank is concerned, they have already attached the said property which was mortgaged in their favour and therefore, the loan which was taken from the Punjab National Bank has been secured. It is further submitted that so far as the other banks are concerned, he has cleared all those loans and no complaint has been filed by any of these banks. It is further submitted that there was not an offence to obtain loan on the basis of - 3 - mortgaging a property to number of banks by creating additional charges over the said property. It was, therefore, submitted that the custodial interrogation of the applicant would not be necessary. 5 The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, invited my attention to the affidavit-in-reply and submitted that during the course of the transaction, it had transpired that on the basis of the same property, the original documents were forged and loan was obtained from various banks. Averments to that effect have been made in para 7 of the affidavit-in-reply filed by the State. 6. Taking into consideration the serious allegations which are made against the present applicant, in my view, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The investigation is still in progress. The allegations apart from forgery and fabrication of original documents and mis-representation is that the said property also had been sold simultaneously to third parties which is evident from - 4 - the chart which is annexed to the affidavit-in-reply. Under these circumstances, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. 7 The application for anticipatory bail is, therefore, rejected. Interim order passed by this court is continued for a period of one week in order to enable the applicant to surrender before the Magistrate. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)