1 Cri-A-4511-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4511 OF 2010 Hitesh Hasmukh Kareliya ... Applicant (Accused No.1) Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Ms. Anjali Patil,Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa,APP, for the respondent- State CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 10th December, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. 2. According to the prosecution, the present applicant had secured home loan of Rs.23 lac from Corporation Bank on 13.9.2003 against his property, being Flat No.26, 5th Floor,Kamal Kunj, Poddar Road, Malad (East), Mumbai, admeasuring about 1500 sq. ft. His wife and mother had also joined in obtaining the loan. They had executed certain documents. After paying a few instalments, they stopped making payment. Thereafter, it was revealed that the applicant and his family members had obtained home loans not only from Corporation Bank, but also from three other Banks, namely, Uco Bank,Indian Overseas Bank and 2 Cri-A-4511-10.sxw Syndicate Bank. Al the four Banks filed reports against the applicant and his family members. In three cases filed by Uco Bank, Indian Overseass Bank and Syndicate Bank, the applicant was granted bail. In the present case, based on the report of Corporation Bank, he is in custody since 31.10.2006. It appears that against the applicant, case under Sections 465, 467, 408, 471,420 read with Section 120B of IPC has been registered. Trial of the case is not even commenced though the applicant is in jail for last more than four years. It appears that different Banks have also started the proceedings before the D.R.T. for recovery of the money and on the basis of the application filed by Uco Bank, the said flat has been already attached. As per the Valuation Report dated 20.10.2010 issued by Yardi Prabhu Consultants & Valuers Pvt.Ltd., the present value of that property is Rs.1.5 crore. The applicant seeks bail. 3. It is not that the applicant did not have the property and that he had produced forged documents. Basic case against him is that against the same property, he had obtained loans from different Bank and thus cheated them, but at the same time the property has been attached and the amount can be recovered. The applicant is in jail for more than four years. Trial is not commenced. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it is necessary to grant him bail. 3 Cri-A-4511-10.sxw 4. The applicant be released on his executing P.R.Bond of Rs.15,000/- with a surety in the like amount with condition that he shall not misuse the bail. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)