aba-479-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.479 OF 2011 Prakash Vishnu Mane ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru' Pantnagar Police Station, Ghatkopar, Mumbai ... Respondent Mr. R.D. Suryawanshi i/b. Mr. R.D. Salve for the Applicant. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent. Mr. M.D. Pokale for the Intervenor/First Informant. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 6 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. R.D. Suryawanshi, the learned Advocate, for the Applicant and Mr. M.D. Pokale, the learned Advocate, for the Intervenor/First Informant. 2. The substance of the allegation against the Applicant, who is sought to be arrested in C.R. No.156 of 2011 of Pantnagar Police Station, Ghatkopar, Mumbai, is that though he was eligible for getting one room under the S.R.A. Scheme, he, by producing forged and false documents before the concerned Authorities, actually secured two rooms in two different Societies, aba-479-11.sxw 2 Dixit apart from securing one more room in the name of his wife. The allegation is that a bogus Deed of Divorce was prepared by the Applicant and his wife for the purpose of misleading the concerned Authorities and securing a separate room in the name of the Applicant's wife. 3. I have seen the papers relating to investigation. Whether the Deed of Divorce is a forged and fabricated document is debatable. The fact, however, remains that, prima facie, the Applicant appears to have forged electricity bills and submitted the same to the concerned Authorities. The Applicant has, till now, retained the possession of both the rooms which came to be allotted to him and has not surrendered any of them. No satisfactory explanation could be offered by the learned Advocate for the Applicant regarding the forged electricity bills and as to how the Applicant could get two rooms under the S.R.A. Scheme. Rather, that the electricity bills are forged, is conceded. Thus, it appears that there exists a prima facie case against the Applicant. The possibility of some other persons, including Government Officers, being involved in the matter cannot be ruled out. The matter, therefore, requires full and thorough investigation. 4. Under these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicant. 5. The Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]