1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.566 OF 2010 Mr. Ramrudavan Mishra. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr.Karun Bhosale along with Mr. Abhijit Salve i/by Wasim Ansari for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A.Mane, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Pradhan i/by Smt. S.D.Khot for the original complainant. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 17th March, 2010 PC : 1 Heard all parties. 2 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail. The alleged offence is under Section-341,380,441,454,467, 468 471 of the I.P.C. The case of the complainant by name Padam Singh is that he is in possession of the property bearing 2 Room No.22, Society No.9, Meghana Co.op. Housing Society. SVP Nagar, Mhada Andheri (W) and that the original owner person by name Shaikh has put him in possession under an agreement of sale dated 21.7.1998. It is his case that on 16.11.2009 he received telephonic call from the Secretary of the society that his house has been illegally occupied. He then rushed to the Police Station Varsova. But on reaching there, he realized that he did not have the document of title which he had kept in the bank. Ultimately he lodged F.I.R. on 16.12.2009. The record indicates that on 16.12.209 the present applicant had filed suit in the Bombay City Civil Court contending therein that he is in possession of the suit premises. A glance of the plaint indicates that the suit is for injunction. The complainant in his suit has contended that the accused has made an attempt to dispossess him. The case of the applicant is that he is in possession of the suit premises under an agreement of sale executed by owner Mr.Shaikh in the year 1992 in his 3 favour. I have perused the said agreement. It is for cash consideration of Rs.50,000/-. There is no mention in the said agreement that the possession is handed over to the applicant. Advocate for the applicant is not in a position to show any documentary evidence to show that the possession of the flat was handed over to the applicant . Number of articles are missing from the said flat and the police have registered offence under Section 380 of the I.P.C. In this background, particularly, since the articles are required to be traced, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Application is therefore, rejected. It is made clear that any observations made in this order will not be taken into account by the trial court at the time of trial. Application is disposed off. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)