1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3551/2009 [VIJAY MUKUNDERAO DOBALE ..VS... STATE OF MAHARASHTRA] ......................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ......................................................................................................................................... Mr. Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate, for the applicant Mr. D.P.Thakare, APP, for respondent CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATE : DECEMBER 18, 2009. Heard. The applicant has been protected by ad-interim direction issued vide order dated 3rd December, 2009. The learned APP has made a grievance that in spite of an order passed by this Court, the applicant has not attended the I.O. However, learned APP was not able to show any record regarding the applicant being summoned by the I.O as directed by the interim order. The learned counsel for the applicant has stated that for want of instructions he is not able to state whether the applicant was called by the I.O. and even thereafter he has not attended or otherwise. Apart from the aforesaid, the crux of the entire matter is the ownership of the land for which agreement is said to have been executed by the applicant. The crime in question has been registered on 4.11.2009. The statement of wife of the applicant who is claiming to be the owner of the said land is said to have been recorded during the course of investigation. 2 In spite of the same, the learned APP was not able to apprise the Court regarding the manner in which she claimed to have become the owner of the land. The learned APP has stated that the investigation is still in progress. Having regard to the aforesaid facets and the purpose for which Section 438 of Cr.P.C is legislated, it appears to be a fit case for extending relief under the said section with some rider for safeguarding the rights of the investigation, which apparently appears to be in progress. The ad-interim direction given vide order dated 3rd December, 2009, is hereby confirmed untill the conclusion of the investigation in the same crime on the same terms & conditions upon which the same was passed with the condition that the learned counsel for the applicant within two days to inform the Mobile Number of the applicant to the I.O and the I.O. shall summoned the applicant for the purposes of investigation if required by sending SMS upon the same and thereon the applicant shall attend accordingly. Liberty to the prosecution in accordance with law to apply for modification or for cancellation of aforesaid direction if warranted in future due to the receipt of any material in further investigation. JUDGE Rvjalit