1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2461 OF 2010 Satish S/o.Tarachand Yadav, Age-20 years, Occu-Student, R/o.Gandhinagar, Tal.Jalna, Dist. Jalna APPLICANT VERSUS 1. The District Supdt.of Police, Jalna, 2. Police Inspector, Taluka Police Station, Jalna, Dist. Jalna RESPONDENTS Mr.A.B.Gaikwad, learned counsel for applicant. Mrs.V.A.Shinde, learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 09/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in connection with CR No. 168/2010, registered in Taluka Jalna Police Station. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned APP for State. 2 Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. Perusal of the complaint shows that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of Shivaji Uttamrao Bhakare. He has purchased one tractor from one Shrirang Warale in the month of April 2009 for the consideration of Rs.4,90,000/- for which he has paid Rs.40,000/- For the remaining amount of consideration, he has raised loan from State Bank of Hyderabad. The tractor was sold by the original owner to the complainant as he was unable to repay the monthly installments of the bank. It appears that in the month of August 2009, the tractor require some repairs to the worth of Rs. 15,000/- As the complainant was not having sufficient funds, he took the loan from the present applicant and agreed to repay within the period of 2 months with the interest charged thereon. Some blank bond papers, duly signed by the complainant were handed over to the present applicant. Account was also opened in Priyadarshini Bank, by depositing Rs.1,000/- and thereafter cheque book was obtained from the said bank, and two blank cheques were also issued to the present applicant. As during the stipulated period, neither the loan was repaid not the interest was paid by the complainant to the 3 applicant, it is alleged that forcibly the applicant took away the tractor from the custody of the complainant. Hence the complaint. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the tractor was forcibly taken away by the applicant as per the allegations in the complaint somewhere in the month of November or December 2009, while the complaint was lodged in the month of May 2010. Absolutely, there is no explanation of delay caused in lodging the complaint, when the bread of complainant is only depends upon the sole earning from the said tractor. In view of this, according to learned counsel for applicant, this is a false complaint in which the applicant require to be released on pre-arrest bail. 4. While opposing the bail application, it is contended by the learned APP that during the search of the residential premises of the applicant, 72 blank bond papers were recovered for which till date, the police officer concerned has not taken any action against the applicant. Still the fact remains that the alleged tractor was not found with the applicant. It is but natural that when the search of premises of the applicant was taken by the concerned Police Officer, he must be available for interrogation, but it did not appear that he 4 was interrogated on this point. Considering the entire scenario, a case is made out to enlarge the applicant on pre-arrest bail. Order accordingly, O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with CR No. 168/2010, registered in Taluka Jalna Police, applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. Applicant to give attendance in Taluka Jalna Police Station once on every Monday till filing of charge sheet. It is hereby made clear that investigation agency is not precluded to take action against applicant about the blank bond papers recovered from his premises, in case aggrieved parties lodged complaint against him. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri-appl-2461-10