IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.25 OF 2009 1.Abhilash Mahadeo Patil 2.Rahul Vishnu Badve ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri A.A. Kumbhokoni, Senior Advocate i/b. Shri Umesh Mankapure for Applicants Shri S.R. Shinde, APP for State ---- ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.37 OF 2009 Prashant Suresh More ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri Amit Sale for Applicant Shri S.R. Shinde, APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 25TH FEBRUARY, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. This is an application for anticipatory bail. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that the complaint was lodged by one person against the present Applicants, alleging that they had made representation to various people that on payment of Rs.999/- they would get certain articles such as watch etc. and, thereafter if they work more to bring additional members, they would get further benefit. In the complaint it was alleged that the idea of the Applicants was to defraud the innocent people by making false representation. The original complainant himself has not paid any amount to the Applicants herein. The Applicant in Criminal Application No.37 of 2009 is a person, who had deposited Rs.999/- and had become member of the said scheme. 4. The learned APP for the State was not in a position to disclose any material on statement of any witnesses stating therein that after payment of Rs.999/-, the articles as promised to them were not given or that after new members were enrolled with the original accused, further payment as promised was not paid. In the absence of any such material, therefore, it is difficult to state what offence has actually been committed by the present Applicants. 5. In my view, the facts as stated in the complaint, prima facie do not constitute any offence either under the Indian Penal Code or any other law for the time in force and, as such, even otherwise, even if there is a breach of promise, at the most, it would amount to a breach of contract, unless certain other material is shown by the Complainant. Under these circumstances, in my view, custodial interrogation of the Applicants, in any case, is not required. The Applicants would be entitled to get anticipatory bail. However, this anticipatory bail is granted for limited period. In the event, if any material is received by the prosecution against the present Applicants, the prosecution may apply for cancellation of bail or modification of this order. 6. Under these circumstances, the Applicants, in the event of their arrest in connection with C.R. No.219 of 2008 initially registered at Vishrambag Police Station and, thereafter, transferred to Local Crime Branch, Sangli be released on bail in a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicants shall report to the concerned police station viz. Local Crime Branch, Sangli for a period of 8 days between 11 a.m. & 2 p.m. and, thereafter, as and when called. Liberty is granted to the Applicants to apply for cancellation of anticipatory bail, in the event, any further material is found against the present Applicants. 7. Both the applications are, accordingly, disposed of. V.M. KANADE J.