IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLICATION NO.4089 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.4089 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.4089 OF 2008 1.Mr Vinay Padmakant Dalal, 2.Mrs Milan alias Minal Vinay Dalal. Applicants Vs 1.The State of Mah.and anr. .. Respondents. Mr A.P.Mundargi with Mr Rajesh Mirchandani i/b Paras Kuhad & Associates, for the applicants. Mr Y.S.Shinde, APP, for the respondent-State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. DATE : 21/11/2008 DATE : 21/11/2008 DATE : 21/11/2008 PC: PC: PC: 1. Heard Mr.Mundargi, learned senior counsel for the applicants and Mr.Shinde, learned APP, for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.99 of 2008 of Lonawala police station. The said crime has been registered against the applicants for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 418, 420 read with 34 of IPC. 3. The crime, in the present case, has been registered against the applicants in pursuance of the order passed by the JMFC, Vadagaon Maval under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.on the private complaint filed in June, 2008 by respondent no.2 Vijay Sanghavi. The allegations against the applicants are that on 12.4.2008, 20.5.2008 and 25.5.2008 they accepted certain amounts from the complainant and executed Isar Pawati (MOU) in his favour in respect of a plot of land situated at Lonawala. According to the complainant, he paid Rs.43,05,500/- to the applicants and Rs.seven lacs and some odd was the balance. In the meanwhile, the applicants, according to the complainant, entered into an agreement with third party and accepted Rs. ten lacs as earnest money in respect of the very same land and thereby, they have committed an offence under section 420 of IPC. As against this, it appears, the applicants sent the entire amount that was paid to them (Rs.43,05,500) by Demand Draft to the complainant thereby indicating that they were not prepared to enter into the sale deed in respect of the said plot of land. According to the applicants, they never executed Isar Pawati (MOU), as alleged by the complainant. This Court is informed that the complainant has already filed a suit against the applicants for specific performance of an agreement before the appropriate Court. Considering the nature of dispute and the allegations made against the applicants and looking to their age, I am inclined to grant this application for anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order. 4. In the event of arrest, the applicants to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one or two sureties to make up the said amount, subject to condition that applicant no.2 shall report to the concerned police station every Wednesday and Saturday between 10 and 11 am for a period of one month commencing from 26.11.2008 and thereafter as and when called by the Investigating Officer. Such condition is not imposed on applicant no.1 since, this court is informed, he is in hospital. . While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case without being influenced by the observations made in this order. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)