IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.9/2008 Sheshnathsingh Khan ..vs.. State =================================== CORAM: S.R. DONGAONKAR, J. DATE:12.3.2008 Heard. Mr. Khan Advocate for applicant & Shri Kothari, Advocate for respondent – state. Only question is whether the interim order dated 8.1.08 needs to be confirmed. Learned counsel for the applicant relying on Full Bench Decision of this court in 2004 Bombay Case Reporter 564 Sadashiv ..vs.. Eknath has submitted that the suit for permanent injunction on the basis of the agreement of sale, & possession has been filed and the matter is of civil nature and therefore, interim order should be confirmed. Learned A.P.P. relying on the provisions of section 17 of the Registration Act submitted that as the agreement for sale under which the possession was delivered, can not be enforced as it is not registered. Question as to whether that agreement can be enforced or not, is of civil nature. As the learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that by an amendment to the plaint, claim for specific performance of contract has also been preferred in the said suit, the case of the applicant becomes strong, as regards the anticipatory bail. In these circumstances, interim order dated 8.1.2008 is hereby confirmed. In the event of arrest of the applicant for the offence punishable under sections 448, 420, 468, 471 read with section 34 of IPC in crime No.118/2007 of Police Station, Pachpaoli, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety and P.R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- subject to conditions that he shall report at Police Station, Pachpaoli as and when directed by the I.O. for the purposes of investigation and shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE smp.