1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL APPOLICATION NO.: 3816 OF 2008 Bhimrao S/o Nagorao Sarode Versus The State of Maharashtra and another. *** Mr. S. P. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. K. M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** 1. Heard learned counsel extensively. Shankar Mutthu Tamil had controversies with the accused applicant Bhimrao Nagorao Sarode for which an application was moved to the Home Minister on 12th April, 2008. The matter was remitted to the police. It was during the course of police making inquiry, the stamp purported to be dated 1st April, 2002 on a stamp of Rs.20/- was produced by the present accused Bhimrao to have been executed by the complainant Shankar and his wife. The complainant was astonished to find such a document as according to him he had never signed such document and had no question to borrow the amount. He felt suspicion and, thereafter, lodged the report with the police. The accused applicant claims to be in Government servant and by virtue of protection he is already enjoying bail, 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. however, under suspension. 2. The factual matrix indicated in the F.I.R. cannot be said to be incomplete to make out a case. At this stage, the F.I.R. or the report cannot be stated to be a complete encyclopedia of the details. After the handwriting expert's opinion as to who is the author or who has put signature of said Shankar Mutthu the matter will be clarified. There are two witnesses referred to the document dated 1st April, 2002 namely Gautam Nagorao Kale and Bhojaji Yadav Kale. Their statements are also recorded. In view of this situation, it cannot be said that the prosecution against the accused applicant herein is with malafide intention or no case is made out. The quashing and setting aside of the proceeding, as sought, cannot be entertained. Accordingly application rejected. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:31/07/2009. ans/3816