1 criapln2349-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2349 OF 2011 1] Anil Madhukar Budhwant 2] Sanjay Sayas Bondar .. APPLICANTS Vs 1] The State of Maha. .. RESPONDENT ... Shri M.R.Andhale, Adv.for applicants. Shri G.R.Ingole,APP for R-State. ... CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE,J. DATE : 11/07/2011 ORAL ORDER: 1] This application is filed for anticipatory bail in Crime No.11/2011 registered in Dharur police station, Dist.Beed, for offences punishable U/ss. 365 & 34 of I.P.C. Papers of investigation are made available by A.P.P. Heard both sides. 2] Crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Angad brother of Sushen who was taken away forcibly from residential place 2 criapln2349-11 by applicants. There are allegations that present applicants work for sugar factory and they had made agreement with Ganesh the other brother of complainant. Ganesh was to supply labours to sugar factory and for that, he had taken advance of around Rs.6 lacs according to advocate of applicants. Ganesh did not supply labour. On 11/11/10, applicants came in one car to the village of Sushen and after making enquiry about Ganesh, they forcibly took away Sushen with them in the car. Sushen was detained in factory premises. It appears that proceeding was initiated u/s 97 of Cr.P.C. and even Writ Petition for habeas corpus was filed by the relatives of Sushen. After release of Sushen report came to be given to police. 3] It was submitted for the applicants that delay was caused in giving the report and only to avoid liability of returning the amount, applicants are falsely implicated in the case. Papers of investigation which include statements of witness and statement of Sushen show that Sushen was forcibly taken away by applicants in a car and he was detained in factory premises. This was done to bring pressure on the family of Sushen to return the amount. Advocate of applicants submitted that some agricultural land was sold and some amount was also returned to the factory but after that compromise report came to be given. 3 criapln2349-11 4] The incidents of such nature are increasing day by day. Though there is contention that advance amount was taken by Ganesh, such mode cannot be used for recovery of the amount, even of sugar factory. There is sufficient material to make out prima facie case for offence for which the crime is registered. In view of these circumstances, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and so application stands rejected. [T.V.NALAWADE,J.] umg/criapln2349-11