1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1582 OF 2010 Shivajirao Ganpat Varal ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & anr. ...Respondents ..... Shri V.D.Hon, advocate for the applicant Shri P.P.More, A.P.P. for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 3rd May, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri V.D.Hon, advocate for the applicant and Shri P.P.More, A.P.P. for the respondents. 2 This is an application for anticipatory bail preferred by applicant apprehending his arrest under CR No. I-28 of 2010, registered at Parner police station, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 420, 427, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by one Prabhu Balku Varal on 5.2.2010 alleging that the applicant herein prepared a false power of attorney purportedly executed by Dattatraya Waman Bhat on 12.3.1994 and on the basis of said power of attorney got transferred the property Grampanchayat No. 523 in the name of Hindvi Education Society in collusion with Gramsevak, although the said person namely Dattatraya Waman Bhat was not in existence in the village at the relevant time. 4 Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the applicant is trustee of Hindvi Education Society and said society has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 22 of 2008 against the complainant herein and obtained injunction from the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Parner against the complainant on 22.4.2008. Learned counsel for the applicant also pointed out from para 9 of the present application that the said original power of attorney has been produced in the said suit and on the basis of said power of attorney, interim injunction has been granted in favour of the applicant and against the complainant herein. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the complainant has neither challenged the said order dated 22.4.2008 so far, nor made any grievance about the said power of attorney in the said suit, nor filed any separate suit challenging the said power of attorney and filed the present application alleging the said power of attorney as false, fabricated and forged. Admittedly, the Civil Court is the proper forum to decide whether the said power of attorney dated 3 12.3.1994 is forged, fabricated and false and not the investigating agency. 5 Apparently, it appears that the matter is of civil nature, and therefore, present application deserves to be allowed. The possibility of false implication of the applicant in the present crime on the basis of civil dispute cannot be ruled out, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. 6 In the result, application is allowed, and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with CR No. I-28 of 2010, registered at Parner police station, District Ahmednagar, he be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount, on the following conditions :- (i) Applicant shall attend the police station as and when required on written intimation and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly or indirectly. (iii) Applicant shall give where abouts of Dattatraya Waman Bhat to the investigating agency. 4 7 The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1582.10