[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2616 OF 2008 Kiran Ramprasad Varma ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mrs.Gauri S.Rao and S.B.Rao Advocate for Applicant Mr.K.V.Saste APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 28, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 28, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 28, 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 FIR No.141 of 2008 of Vijapur Naka Police Station, Solapur. The said case is mainly under Sections 420 and 468 of IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that one co-accused Shyam Rathod was the Chairman of the School for Deaf and Dumb children. The present application and one other accused was the friend of Mr.Shyam [-2-] Rathod. The complainant knew one Sikandder Shaikh and Amit Verma. They were working in the above institution. They informed the complainant and one post of a teacher was vacant in the school and the complainant may try for the said post. The complainant came to Solapur and he met co-accued Shyam Rathod and enquired about the job. Shyam Rathod informed the complainant that he fills the post in the said school through the applicant and one B.R.Patil. The complainant was asked to apply for the post. Thereafter, appointment letter was given by the Institution to the complainant and he was also given salary of one month by the Institution, however, thereafter, the complainant did not get any salary. When he made enquiry with all the three accused persons, he was called in the Institution office and he was told that the construction work of the said building was still going on and hence, there was some financial difficulties. The complainant was asked to give a loan of Rs.3 lakhs and he was told that the amount would be returned within six months. The said money was to be used for the construction of Institution. Accordingly, the complainant handed over Rs.2,60,000/- to co-accused Shyam Rathod. [-3-] Shyam Rathod gave him a post dated cheque in the sum of Rs.2,60,000/-. The complainant has stated that thereafter co-accused Shyam Rathod started behaving arrogantly with the complainant, hence, suspicion was formed in the mind of the complainant. When the complainant deposited the cheque given by co-accused Shyam, the said cheque bounced, hence, the FIR came to be lodged. The case of the complainant is that money was taken in a similar fashion from some other persons. 4. It may be stated here that the applicant is not associated with the Institution in any manner. It is not the prosecution case that the appointment letter is a forged letter given to the complainant or to any other persons or any amount was demanded by the applicant or anyone from the complainant to give him a post in the said institution. It is not the case of the complainant that any amount was handed over for construction of the building to the applicant but clear case of the complainant is that the amount was handed over to co-accused Shyam Rathod. It is the further case of the complainant that cheque for return of money given by Shyam Rathod, had bounced. It appears that Shyam Rathod [-4-] is the main person involved in this incident. Looking to the above facts, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. In the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rs.forty thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant shall report to Vijapur Naka Police Station, Solapur on every Saturday between 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet. 6. It is made clear that this order granting anticipatory bail shall operate only till filing of the charge sheet in view of the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in the matter of K.L.Verma K.L.Verma K.L.Verma Vs. State and another; reported in (1998) 9 Vs. State and another; reported in (1998) 9 Vs. State and another; reported in (1998) 9 S.C.C. 348. S.C.C. 348. S.C.C. 348. 7. Application is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]