IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL APPLICATION ( BAIL ) NO. 209 OF 2010 MR. SAVAN VITAL NAIK ... Applicant Versus STATE THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR AND ANR., ... Respondents Shri Arun Bras De Sa, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri C. A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondents. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 7th September, 2010 P.C.:- Heard. The applicant herein seeks anticipatory bail, after the same has been denied to him by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa by Order dated 25-8-2010. From the reply filed, it can be seen that one Rishikesh Narayan Naik had filed a complaint/F.I.R. dated 23-7-2010 which came to be registered a month later on 22-8-2010 as Crime No.242/2010 under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 r/w 34 I.P.C. The case of the Respondents is that between April, 2009 to 15-7-2010 the accused person, namely the applicant who is also known as Amit Khotkar, Ms. Sonali Arondekar and one Mr. Anil(whose name and address is not known), with their common intention had taken two cheques of Rs.10,000/- each from the said informant Rishikesh Narayan Naik and other documents and cash of Rs.60,000/- and promised to give him loan from the Travorcore Bank, Panaji Branch, and as the loan did not materialize, the accused cheated the Complainant to the tune of Rs.80,000/-. It is also stated that the accused also forged the said cheques and produced them in the Bank to withdraw a huge amount of Rs.2,50,000/- with a fraudulent intention to file a case under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The facts stated in para 4 of the reply filed on behalf of the Respondents are not very clear. Nevertheless, it is pointed out by Shri Arun Bras De Sa, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, by referring to reply dated 30-6-2010 that the liability towards the said two cheques of Rs.10,000/- each has been met by the accused by sending demand draft of Rs.20,000/-. This reply dated 30-6-2010 was sent by the applicant when the said first informant had served a statutory notice demanding the payment of Rs.20,000/- due on the said cheques after the same had got dishonoured. Regarding the withdrawal of Rs.2,50,000/-, it appears that as the cheque given by the said first informant to the applicant was dishonoured, the applicant has filed the complaint against the said first informant and the first informant has produced the said cheque of Rs.2,50,000/- in the said complaint dated 26-8-2010. As far as the two cheques are concerned, it can be seen that the first informant has already received a sum of Rs.20,000/-, and as far as the third cheque is concerned, the applicant has already proceeded against the first informant by filing a complaint where the said cheque has been produced and is otherwise available to the Respondent. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the applicant has been acting as a facilitator to obtain loans from the said Travorcore Bank and has been cheating the members of the pubic and this is not the first case in which he is involved. On the other hand, it is submitted by Shri Arun Bras De Sa that whenever cheques given are bounced it is not unusual for the accused persons to come up with various defences including that the signature was forged. Learned Counsel further submits that there is nothing to be recovered from the possession of the applicant, as the cheque of Rs.2,50,000/- has already been produced along with the complaint and in case the prosecution so desires the same can be obtained from the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Mapusa where the complaint filed by the applicant is pending. Considering the facts of the case, as stated herein above, in my view, this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The amount due on the first two cheques have been repaid. Whether the third was forged or not will be decided in the said complaint. Nothing is required to be attached from the applicant. Consequently, the application is allowed. In the event of the arrest of the applicant, the applicant shall be released on bail upon execution of a bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer and with a further condition that the accused shall remain present before the Investigation Officer on one day as desired by the Investigation Officer between 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. with a view to facilitate further investigations of the case. Application disposed off. Authenticated copy of the Order be given to the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.