SSM 1 33.aba.351.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 351 OF 2011 Mr. Chiranjit Benoy Basu ....Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _____________ Mr. Niteen Pradhan i/b Mr. Abdul Kadar Millwala for the Applicant. Ms. Alpa T. Javeri, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM: R. C. CHAVAN, J. DATED : 25 TH APRIL, 2011. P.C.: This is an application by a person who is alleged to have posed as a lawyer at the time of Income Tax raid in May, 2009 at the house of Parumita Chakravarty @ Parumita Buddhadev Bhattacharya. First informant Smt. Usha Mishra is alleged to have let her flat to Parumita, and as Parumita claimed to be daughter of the first wife of Shri. Buddhadev Bhattacharya, Chief Minister of West Bengal, advanced Lakhs of rupees to said Parumita, Applicant is alleged to have telephonically assured the first informant that Parumita was well SSM 2 33.aba.351.11 connected and first informant would get her money back. Considering the nature of allegations made in the FIR it is not clear as to why for the purpose of investigation and applicant's being in custody for interrogation is necessary. Hence, application is allowed as applicant's being in custody for the purpose of further investigation may not be necessary. Hence, in the event of the Applicant's arrest in the C.R. No.106 of 2011 registered with Amboli Police Station, he be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.50,000/- on the following conditions :- i) The applicant shall make himself available on 2 nd May, 2011 at 11.00 a.m. for interrogation by Investigating Officer and thereafter as and when required Investigating Officer. ii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such SSM 3 33.aba.351.11 facts to the Court or to any police officer. iii)The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. iv) The order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if chargesheeted the applicant may furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre -vs- State of Maharashtra and ors, in S.L.P No.7615 of 2009. v) The application stands disposed of accordingly. 2. The applicant would furnish his Mobile numbers to the Investigation Officer and the Investigation Officer would communicate with the applicant by SMS and the applicant would appear before the Investigating Officer whenever required. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)