IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3454 OF 2009 alongwith CRIMINAL APPLICATION NOS. 3461 & 3462 OF 2009 Mukesh Narayan Gade Anand Javakar Pragati Naik & anr. ....... Applicants versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi Sr. counsel i/b. V.V.Purwant in Appln.no. 3454 , Mr. A.P.Mundargi i/b. Kuldeep Patil in Appln. No. 3641 & 3462/09 adv. for the Applicant Mr. H.J. Dedhia APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 7th August, 2009. P. C.: 1. These are the applications moved by the applicants under section 439 of Cr.P.C. For their release on bail. The applicants are charged for commission of offence under section 420,l 465, 467, 468, 471 read with 34 of IPC in C.R. No. 154/09 registered with Byculla Police Station, Mumbai. The applicants are arrested on 8th July 2009 and are in custody for a period of one month. According to the complaint, the applicants represented the complainant that they have obtained a dealership from Dr. Hemang Vasavad. The dealership rights purported to have been obtained by the applicants firm “Gangotri Beverages” was in regard to distribution of foreign liquor. The applicants are stated to have offered a partnership and a directorship in the said firm to the complainant subject to certain terms and conditions. According to the complainant he has paid a sum of Rs. 10 lacs for the said purpose. It is also claimed that Rs. One lac arising out of some earlier transaction is also recoverable from the applicants. According to the complainant himself he was not interested to become a director in the firm and hence had withdrawn himself from the proposed business venture. One of the applicants by name Pravin Khanvilkar did issue cheques in the sum of Rs. 10 lacs to the complainant with a view to return the amount of contribution made by the complainant. However the cheques were not honored and bounced on account of non availability of funds. Aggrieved thereby the complainant herein has instituted proceedings under section 138 of N.I.Act. After filing of the complaint under section 138 of N.I.Act , without disclosing the said fact, the present complaint has been filed. From perusal of the report filed by the police in the present C.R. Dated 7-8-2009, it can be clearly seen that the police itself is doubting the veracity of the version narrated by the complainant. It is also stated therein that the documents which are taken in possession by the police and/or produced by the parties, police has doubts about the commission of the offence itself. It is also stated that during the investigation, it is not found that the applicants have forged the documents and used them. It is also stated that the complainant had suppressed the fact of filing of complaint under section 138 of N.I.Act. Prima facie it appears that the subject matter of these applications constitute a civil dispute. Proceedings under 138 of N.I.Act are pending. The applicants are in custody for a period of one month and the investigation carried so far has raised a doubt in the mind of the investigating agency about the commission of the offence. In that view of the matter the applications need to be allowed and I proceed to allow the same by passing the following order. 2. In the result the applicants shall be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The applicants shall attend Byculla police station once a week on every Saturday between 4 to 6 p.m. 3. Deposit of cash towards bail amount is permitted for a period of three weeks, within which time the applicant shall arrange for sureties. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)