* 1 * Cri.Appln-3272/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3272 OF 2010 Manish Ashok Malhotra ..... Applicant : V E R S U S : The State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent ********** Mr. A.H.H. Ponda i/by. Mr. S.V. Kotwal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.T. Tulpule with Mr. R.S. Tripathi i/by. Mr. P.P. Prabhu, Advocate for applicant in Application NO.441 of 2010 (Orig.Complainant). Mrs. P.P. Bhosale, APP for State. CORAM : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATED : 25th AUGUST, 2010. P.C. :- 1. The applicant apprehends arrest in C.R. No.59 of 2009 registered with Sakinaka Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 420,465, 468, 471 Indian Penal Code. He is alleged to have forged a * 2 * Cri.Appln-3272/2010 No-Objection Certificate by one Ramprakash Khanna, father of the complainant and used the same while applying to Bombay Municipal Corporation for change of the user of the premises in his possession that were purchased by him from the father of the complainant pursuant to the agreement of sale dated 24th September, 1976. 2. Undisputedly, the parties are at loggerheads fighting proceedings in connection with the premises in occupation of the applicant either under the agreement of sale of the year 1976 or as tenant in the property known as “Khanna Estate”. No-Objection Certificate, the xerox of which was produced by the applicant before the Bombay Municipal Corporation is dated 2nd January, 1996. It is the case of the applicant that this document was found in the old papers concerning the property and was sought to be used for the purpose of obtaining permission from Bombay Municipal Corporation for change of the user. The papers, however, indicate that the original is not with the applicant. * 3 * Cri.Appln-3272/2010 3. The applicant had filed an application before the Sessions Judge for anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected solely on the ground that custodial interrogation of the applicant is required for the purpose of locating the original of the No-Objection Certificate. The arguments advanced on behalf of the Intervenor i.e. the original complainant, as also, the learned APP to oppose the application for anticipatory bail run on the same lines. During their course of the investigation, the police recorded two statements of the applicant, one is dated 21st May, 2009 and the other is dated 23rd December, 2009. In both these statements, the applicant has made a categorical statement that the original No-Objection Certificate has probably been produced before some authority in the past and neither the applicant nor his father remembers as to where the same was produced. This means that the applicant does not have the original No-Objection Certificate in his possession. Considering the above statement and the facts of the case, it is obvious * 4 * Cri.Appln-3272/2010 that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not at all required in the present case. In my opinion, this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the application is allowed by confirming the interim order, i.e. in the event of the arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.59 of 2009 registered with Sakinaka Police Station, he shall be released on bail on his executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]