1 Cri.A.2717.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2717 OF 2011 Dnyaneshwar S/o Digambar Chate, R/o Kinhi Post Tambola, District Buldhana, at present Mahalaxmi Chowk, Thakare Nagar, N-2, CIDCO Aurangabad, Tq and District Aurangabad. ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.R.V.Gore, Advocate for Applicant. Shri.B.J.Sonwane, A.P.P. for Respondent. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 14TH JULY, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail, in Crime No.27 of 2011, registered with Sillod City Police Station, Tq. Sillod, District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under section 420 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Papers of investigation are made available by the learned APP. Both sides are heard. 3. Advocate for the applicant mainly submitted that there is no 2 Cri.A.2717.11 material document to show that at any time complainant had given amount to the applicant. He has produced copy of passbook of the applicant in respect of account No. 20056476145 of State Bank of India, branch Lonar. On the other hand, APP produced copy of receipt of Rs. 18500/- to show that in the same account at Sillod Branch complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 18,500/- on 27.03.2010. 4. The complainant has made allegation that the present applicant and one Prakash Gaikwad had represented to him that they were working for “Aryarup” company. The Company was in the business of plotting. It was represented to the complainant that if complainant was ready to invest amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-, the complainant would get 3,60,000/- within six months. It was represented that as company was in plotting business and earning huge profit, it was possible for the company to pay three times amount, which was invested in the company. Due to this representation complainant gave Rs. 1.25 lakhs to Gaikwad and present applicant. After that also amount of Rs. 9450/- was deposited in the account of Gaikwad and amount of Rs.18,500/- in the account of present applicant. The complainant has made allegation that in spite of making such investment no amount was given to him and thereafter he realized that he was deceived and he demanded the amount to the present applicant, but accused refused 3 Cri.A.2717.11 to refund the amount. He has contended that present applicant and one Gaikwad cheated him for amount of Rs. 1,52,950/-. 5. At present there is receipt in respect of amount of Rs. 18,500/- shown to be deposited in the account of applicant, in Sillod branch of State Bank of India. There is similar receipt in respect of the account of Prakash Gaikad. Papers of investigation show that some more persons came forward to make similar complaint and the record includes statements of Digamber Ghuge and Shrirang Ghuge. In view of this record this Court holds that custodial interrogation is must in such cases, so anticipatory bail cannot be granted to the applicant. So, application stands rejected. [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK