1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1459 OF 2010 Sonaji s/o Raghunath Mane ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri A.R.Joshi, advocate for the applicant Shri P.P.More, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 20th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri A.R.Joshi, advocate for the applicant and Shri P.P.More, A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application for anticipatory bail preferred by applicant herein apprehending his arrest under CR No. 20 of 2009, registered at Kranti Chowk police station, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Vishwanath Ramchandra Chavan before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, on 15.5.2009 against the applicant under Section 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad directed to carry out the investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by order passed on24.8.2009 and accordingly present C.R. No. 20 of 2009 came to be registered against the applicant on 4.9.2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The said complaint recites that complainant Vishwanath Chavan was the President of Parvati Cooperative Housing Society and stated that the applicant had prepared bogus and false documents and thereby cheated the complainant. It is also alleged that the applicant tendered the false and bogus documents to his employer and obtained loan and thereby cheated the complainant as well as the Government. 4 On the afore said back ground, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a Government servant as well as Ex-Chairman of Parvati Cooperative Housing Society and the complainant Vishwanath is also the member of the said society and has filed the present complaint against the applicant to implicate the applicant in the present case falsely out of the rivalry. Learned counsel for the applicant urged that the applicant has filed the suit for specific performance against the complainant and same is pending. It is also 3 submitted that the alleged document is in custody of his employer i.e. Irrigation Department and he is not in possession thereof and it is further submitted that the matter is of civil nature and no crime is involved therein since the documents speak for themselves. 5 Shri More, learned A.P.P. assisted by Shri R.V.Gore, advocate for the complainant, opposed the application vehemently and submitted that the statements of witnesses have been recorded during the course of investigation,which raise the finger against the applicant as the perpetrator to the crime. It is further submitted that there are allegations of forgery and preparation of bogus and false documents against the applicant, which was used for obtaining loan by the applicant, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the further progress in the investigation, and therefore, it is urged present application deserves to be rejected. 6 On perusal of the investigation papers and after considering the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for respective parties, it appears that the applicant is Ex-Chairman of Parvati Cooperative Housing Society and the complainant is also member thereof, and therefore, possibility of false implication of the applicant in the present case cannot be ruled out, out of the rivalry between them. Moreover, the applicant is a Government servant serving with the Irrigation Department and as contended by the applicant, the document in question has been already tendered by him with the 4 Irrigation Department for obtaining loan and same is not in his custody, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for the recovery of the said document. Moreover, it also appears that the applicant has filed the suit against the complainant for specific performance, as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant and same is pending, and therefore, it apparently appears that the matter is of civil nature. 7 In the circumstances, present application deserves to be allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R. No. 20 of 2009, registered at Kranti Chowk police station, District Aurangabad, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount,, on the following conditions :- (i) Applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required on written intimation till filing of charge sheet and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) Applicant shall not tamper with evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly or indirectly. 8 Needless to state that the afore said order shall be in force till filing of the charge sheet. 9 The above observations are prima facie observations and 5 shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1459.10