{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2985 OF 2010 Shankar @ Gaurishankar s/o Ramjivan Darak APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. N.S.Chaudhari, Advocate for the applicant Mr. P.P.More, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 9 th August 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicant has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with M-Case No.16/2010 registered with Omerga Police Station, Dist-Osmanabad for an offence punishable u/s 420, 467 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP. Perused documents annexed with the application as well as the papers which are made available by learned APP for perusal of the Court. {2} 3. One Mahadeoappa Patil has filed private complaint before JMFC, Omerga, against the applicant. In the said private complaint, learned JMFC, Omerga passed an order to carry out investigation u/s 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Accordingly, an offence at M-Case No.16/2010 came to be registered with the Omerga police station against the present applicant. Perusal of the private complaint discloses that as the complainant was intending to start a plant of manufacturing mineral water he came in contact with the applicant. It is further alleged that a MOU was executed between the applicant and the complainant. As per the said MOU, the applicant was to provide machinery, installation of machinery and after sale service. The estimated cost of the said plant, as per the said agreement, was Rs.24,74,000/-. It appears that as per the said contract, certain machinery was supplied by the applicant. The applicant has admitted that the applicant has received an amount of Rs. 17,29,000/- from the complainant, albeit in installments. Accordingly, a letter was addressed by the applicant to the complainant on 14.11.2009 thereby giving cost of the machinery provided to the complainant and some extra material which was provided to the complainant. The total cost of installation of machinery so also machinery was Rs.15,66,600/- and it was made clear by the applicant to the complainant that still an amount of Rs.1,33,400/- is balance with the applicant. By the said communication it was informed that as per the quotation, the {3} entire cast of the plant was Rs.24,74,000/- including the machinery, however, there is no further communication from the complainant and hence it was also informed that if the complainant is not interested for further supply of machinery for the plant, then if intimated, the applicant was ready to return the balance amount of Rs.1,33,400/-, as and when demanded. 4. Perusal of the complaint indicates that though the complainant has parted with an amount of Rs.20,29,000/- yet he received trifle material to the tune of Rs.50,000/- only. From the papers annexed with the application, it appears that after installation of the machinery at the plant of the complainant, the complainant himself had applied to the Bureau of Indian Standards for inspection of the plant for issuance of licence to start the plant. This correspondence between the complainant and BIS is placed on record which shows that even after lodging of the complaint and prior to that there was correspondence on behalf of proposed plant of the complainant for inspection of the plant for issuance of license. Certain photographs of the plant of the complainant are produced on record. The said photographs indicate that major part of the supply of machinery was received by the complainant and was also installed in the proposed plant of the complainant. Thus, papers annexed with the application show that while lodging the complaint certain facts were suppressed by the complainant. Apart from it, it appears that the transaction between the applicant and complainant is of civil nature for which {4} custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 5. In the result, the application is allowed. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with CR No.16/2010 registered with Omerga police station, Dist-Osmanabad, the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant is directed to cooperate the investigating agency. This protection is granted till completion of investigation and report of the same to be submitted before the concerned Criminal Court. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2985-10