[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2436 OF 2008 Shri.Satish Dagadurao Jadhao ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Vilas B.Tapkir Advocate for Applicant Mr.H.J.Dedia APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JULY 31, 2008 DATE : JULY 31, 2008 DATE : JULY 31, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in CR No.170 of 2008 of Warje Malewadi Police Station, Pune. The said case is mainly under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 448 of IPC. 3. There was dispute between the complainant Vasant and his son Sagar. The complainant along with other son Sachin had purchased one flat. Sagar broke open the lock of the flat and started residing there. Thereafter, Sagar got executed a [-2-] false, fabricated and bogus power of attorney purportedly executed by the complainant and Sagar before the present applicant who is an advocate. It is the prosecution case that the applicant prepared the said bogus power of attorney. Admittedly, the applicant has signed on the said power of attorney and he has also identified the person who executed the said power of attorney i.e. the applicant is stated to have identified the complainant, when infact, the complainant had not executed any such power of attorney. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that co-accused Sagar has been granted bail and hence, the applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. It is well settled that the considerations for grant of bail and anticipatory bail are entirely different. The Supreme Court has observed so in the case of State V. Anil Sharma State V. Anil Sharma State V. Anil Sharma reported in 1997 S.C.C. (Cri.) 1039. reported in 1997 S.C.C. (Cri.) 1039. reported in 1997 S.C.C. (Cri.) 1039. 5. Thereafter, it was submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The applicant is not named in the FIR because at the time of lodging of the FIR, the complainant was not aware as to who [-3-] had got document executed and he was not aware of the role of the applicant. Hence, I do not find much merit in the submission that as the name of the applicant is not reflected in the FIR, no case is made out against him. 6. Lastly, it was submitted that the said power of attorney had not been misused by anyone. It may be that till the date of lodging of the FIR, the said power of attorney was not misused but the very fact that false, fabricated and bogus power of attorney was executed, shows that there was every intention to use it at a later date otherwise, there was no purpose for executing such a false, fabricated and bogus power of attorney. The material on record implicates the applicant, hence, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]