1 CAG-5333.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5333 OF 2010 Satish Radhakrishna Dhanuka .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.662 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5333 OF 2010 Satish Radhakrishna Dhanuka .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent And Vijaykumar Madhukar Desai .... Intervener Shri A.H.H. Ponda for the Applicant. Ms P.P. Bhosale, APP, for the State. Shri V.R. Randive for the Intervener. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: JANUARY 21, 2011 P.C: 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person who claims to have entered into an agreement to purchase a property from 2 CAG-5333.10 Dushyant, Bhavna Rana and Rupa Chandel who claim title from a His Highness. The property in fact belongs to Dr. Faruk Dhondi. The applicant claims to have parted with a sum of Rs.33,00,000/- which has been verified by the Sessions Court. But this Rs.33,00,000/- have allegedly gone to the said Dushyant, Bhavna and Rupa, who are not traceable. Even the agent Kaka is also not traceable. The learned counsel for the first informant is right in submitting that there may be a larger conspiracy which would require investigation. But that does mean that the investigation has to be carried out by subjecting the applicant to arrest. The learned counsel for the applicant states that, first, the applicant would not enter the property or disturb the possession of the first informant or threaten the first informant in any manner without getting orders from competent Civil Court. He states that his client would file an affidavit to this effect within a week. Secondly, the learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant would make himself available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required and would also furnish whatever documents are now in possession of the applicant as and when required. In view of this, the application is allowed. In the event 3 CAG-5333.10 of his arrest the applicant be released on bail in C.R. No.350 of 2010 of Bandra Police Station, Mumbai on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the sum aggregating to Rs.50,000/- on the condition that the applicant shall file an affidavit stating that he would not disturb the possession of the first informant or threaten the first informant in relation to the property in any manner except with the orders of the competent Civil Court. The applicant would scrupulously keep himself away from the first informant. The applicant shall report at the police station concerned on 27-1-2011 at 10:00 a.m. for interrogation and thereafter as and when required by the I.O.. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and he shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the trial Court. 2. This order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if charge-sheeted, the applicant may furnish fresh bond before the trial Court in 4 CAG-5333.10 view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court, dated 2-12-2010, delivered in Criminal Appeal No.2271 of 2010, arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 7615 of 2009 {Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.}. 3. The applicant shall file the affidavit by 28-1-2011 failing this order shall stand automatically revoked. 4. Criminal Application No.5333 of 2010 accordingly stands disposed of. 5. In view of disposal of the main application, Criminal Misc. Application No.622 of 2010 also stands disposed of. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)