1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1479 OF 2010 Shriniwas Dhondiram Mundhe & ors. ...Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri B.R.Kedar, advocate for the applicants Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 7th May, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri B.R.Kedar, advocate for the applicants and Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 to 4 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under CR No. 2 of 2010, registered at Shirsala police station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 409, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3 At the out set, learned counsel for the applicants Shri Kedar, on instructions, submits that during the pendency of the present application, applicant no.2 Ramdhan Dhondiram Mundhe has been arrested, and therefore, present application in respect of applicant no.2 has become infructuous, and therefore, requested to withdraw the present application so far as applicant no.2 is concerned. In view of said submission, present application in respect of applicant no.2 stands dismissed as withdrawn, since it has become infructuous. 4 It appears that the complainant namely Sharad Nagorao Gite lodged a private complaint against the applicants before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parli (Vaijnath) on 8.3.2010. Accordingly, said learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parli (Vaijnath) called the report from Shirsala police station under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by order passed on the same date. In pursuance of the said order, first information report came to be registered against the applicants under C.R. No. 2 of 2010 on 9.3.2010. It is alleged in the said complaint that the applicant herein in collusion with the officers and employees of the Beed District Central Cooperative Bank, Shirsala Branch, Taluka Parali (Vaijnath), during the period from 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2008, filed application for National Crop Insurance Scheme 2007-08 and got their names entered as non-debtor members of crop insurance in the list prepared in that respect, and thereby misappropriated the amount of Rs.2,50,594/- by preparing false rubber stamp and extract of Namuna No.8 in collusion with the Talathi 3 of village Shirsala, although they were not having any agriculture land at village Shirsala. 5 On the afore said background, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on the complaint lodged by applicant no.1 herein namely Shriniwas Mundhe, the mother of complainant namely Mangal Nagorao Gite was disqualified from the post of Sarpanch by order dated 4.3.2010 passed by the Additional Collector, Ambajogai, and therefore, the complainant has lodged present complaint falsely as counter blast. It is also urged that applicants have been implicated in this case falsely due to rivalry between the applicants and the complainant. 6 Learned A.P.P. opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that there is prima facie incriminating evidence against the applicants and if anticipatory bail is granted, further investigation in the present crime will be hampered, since the applicants herein have prepared false and bogus documents. Learned A.P.P. also pointed out that earlier C.R. No. 31 of 2009 is pending against one of the applicants and accordingly there are criminal antecedents. 7 On perusal of the investigation papers and considering the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P., it is apparent that the names of applicants have been reflected in the first information report as well as specific 4 role/overt act has been attributed to the applicants in the alleged commission of the offence, and hence, it appears that there is no possibility of false implication of the present applicants in the present crime. Moreover, allegations against the applicants are regarding preparation of bogus documents and seal and if present application is allowed, further progress in the investigation will be hampered and to go to the root of the matter, custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary. Besides that, allegations against the applicants are that in collusion with the bank officers and staff they have misappropriated Rs. 2,50,594/- and they have prepared bogus stamp, and the said apsects are required to be investigated thoroughly, and hence, this is not a fit case to exercise extra ordinary jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and therefore, present application deserves to be rejected. 8 In the result, present application being sans merit stands dismissed. 9 The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1479.10