- 1 - 243 rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 243 OF 2011 Rakesh Patel .. Applicant vs State of Maharashtra & anr .. Respondents Mr.Mishra i.b Law Juris for Applicant Ms.P.P.Shinde APP for Respondent-State Mr.Kapil Dave for Respt no.2 CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J DATE: 15th April, 2011 PER COURT 1. Heard finally. Grant of pre-arrest bail vide C.R.No.2278/2010 by the learned Sessions Judge Gr.Bombay dated 15.12.2010 is questioned. The principal submission is that while furnishing undertaking incorrect address was given by the applicant to mislead the Investigator and also to stall the same. Counter to the above submissions it was due to the address recorded in the - 2 - 243 Pan Card which came to be so recorded in the undertaking and bond. However, by virtue by later permissions granted by the very court on 15.12.2002 in Misc.Application No. 2162/2010 such mistake is curred/corrected. 2. According to the counsel for the complainant, such correct address is basically on 11 months lease and would not tantamount to a permanent address. The accused is not cooperating to the Investigator and hence exercise in terms of section 438 of Cr.P.C. is to be recalled. 3. The position of law concerning cancellation of bail needs to be followed with stringent parameters,substantial instances are to be indicated that there was a breach or abuse of the orders favouring the respondent-accused. The above aspect on the part of respondent no.2 though is - 3 - 243 glaring however, it has been permitted to be cured and accordingly corrected. He may be residing at the premises on lease. However, that by itself will not tantamount that he desires to move away. 4. In addition to earlier directions, to safeguard interest of the complainant and also investigator, additional conditions can be imposed which are highlighted in the order. 5. A survey of the above facts does not indicate that order of grant of bail in terms of section 438 Cr.P.C. suffers from perversity that requires any interference. ORDER 1. Application is rejected. However, - 4 - 243 accused-respondent no. 2 to attend the Investigator on every Sunday between 3 to 6 p.m. till 31.8.2011. He shall give his change address and also furnish the documents as will be mandated by the Investigator. The accused shall not influence the witnesses. He shall also furnish his permanent address to the Investigator. K.U.Chandiwal, J