jpc ba623-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 623 OF 2011 Jaywantrao G. Suryawanshi and others ... Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. A. P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. madhukr Dalvi for the applicants Mrs. S. D.Shinde, APP for the State Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Radhika Thakur i/by Mr. P. M. Havnoor for the original complainant CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 3rd August, 2011. P.C. : 1. The applicants were previously granted anticipatory bail by this Court for a limited duration and they were asked to seek regular bail. The applicants failed to get the regular bail from the Court of Sessions and therefore, once again, had approached this Court. This Court observed that merits of the matter had been considered when the previously the applicants were granted the bail and directed the Court of Sessions to grant regular bail to the applicants. Being aggrieved thereby, the applicants moved the Supreme Court of India by filing a Special Leave Petition and Their Lordships of the Supreme Court, by jpc ba623-11.sxw 2 observing that the Court needed to hear the original complainant, which was not done, directed this Court to rehear the application for anticipatory bail, after giving notice to the original complainant. 2. Accordingly, notice was given to the original complainant and I have heard Mr. Mundargi, the learned counsel for the applicants, Mrs. Shinde, the learned APP for the State and Mr. Shirish Gupte, the learned counsel for the original complainant. 3. The emphasis of Mr. Mundargi is on the fact that the merits of the matter had already been previously considered by this Court and it is only after considering the merits, that the anticipatory bail was granted to the applicants. According to him, there is no change in the circumstances and no new material has been found by the investigating agency, which would justify taking a different view of the matter, at this stage. He submitted that the complainant has not been able to put forth anything new before this Court which would necessitate a change in the opinion of this court. 4. Mr. Gupte, the learned counsel for the original complainant argued that, clearly, a prima facie case of forgery has been made out against the applicants. Without discussing the contentions raised by him and mentioning the material that was available with the investigating agency, it may be observed that there exists a prima facie jpc ba623-11.sxw 3 case against the applicant. It appears that certain documents were forged by the applicants, (or by some of them or one of them) by getting prepared a xerox of some documents, which never existed. 5. However, the matter needs to be viewed from this angle. The applicants' liberty was protected for a considerable time. The grievance of Mr. Mundargi that during the period when the applicants were protected by the anticipatory bail order, the investigating agency did not show any interest in investigating into the matter, appears to be correct. Further, the motive behind the alleged offence seems to be protecting themselves from some allegations of having failed to comely with the statutory requirements. Apparently, the alleged offences were committed as a measure of defence against the allegation of having committed breach of some statutory provisions. In effect, however, the applicants have put themselves in greater difficulties by dishonestly attempting to prepare for their defence. The fact remains, that no pecuniary or financial gain had been made by the applicants by committing the alleged offences and further that making of such gain was not the apparent purpose behind the alleged offences. 6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the application filed by the applicants should be rejected at this distance of time. However, since, there is grievance that the jpc ba623-11.sxw 4 applicants are not cooperating with the investing agency, I think it proper to limit the duration of the bail that is being granted to the applicant for a particular period only. The idea behind this rather unusual step of limiting the duration of the bail is that this court would be in a position to review the matter after some further investigation into the matter is carried out. 7. So far, the applicants have not actually been arrested and released on execution of bail bonds. The anticipatory bail granted to the applicants was for a limited duration and thereafter, as directed by this Court, regular bail was granted to the applicant by the Court of Sessions. It is, however, a fact that pursuant to that order also, the applicants have not executed any bail bonds as they were not placed under arrest or in detention at any time. 8. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the application is disposed of as follows: i. The applicants shall surrender themselves before the investigating agency, tomorrow itself and in the event of their arrest, they be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand ) each, with one surety in like amount or cash in lieu of surety, on the following conditions: (a)The applicants shall report to the concerned police jpc ba623-11.sxw 5 station and make themselves available for investigation/ interrogation, every day between 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. for a period of two weeks from 5th August, 2011. (b)The applicants shall, even thereafter, continue to attend the police station and make themselves available for investigation/interrogation, as and when required by the Investigating Officer. ii. This order, granting bail to the applicants, shall remain in force for a period of two months from today. It shall become absolute, if a charge sheet is filed within this period. If, however, no charge sheet is filed in this period, the bail order shall come to an end on expiry of the aforesaid period of two months. iii. Liberty to the applicants to move afresh for bail/anticipatory bail after the expiry of the period of two months, after giving notice to the original complainant in writing. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)