1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 1154/2010 Shri. Indrakumar s/o. Premchand Chawla V/s. Shri. Laxman s/o Pralhad Somkunwar and another ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr H. D. Dangre, counsel for the applicant Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 17th June 2011 1. By this application, the applicant prayed to quash an order dated 07/06/2010 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-4, Nagpur in Misc. Criminal Application No. 897/2010, in Laxman V/s. State of Maharashtra by which the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-4, Nagpur, allowed the application and granted benefit of anticipatory bail in favour of Laxman Pralhad Somkunwar in respect of crime no. 134/2010 reported at Sadar Police Station, under Section 420, 467, 471 of Indian Penal Code. 2 2. It is grievance of the applicant herein that in respect of document styled as copy of ‘Gift Deed’ allegedly executed by Pursat B. Mohammed Shariff on 11/12/1986 regarding Khasra No. 19, admeasuring 0.34 HR which is bounded by; Towards East Khasra No. 20, Towards West – Railways Crossing, Towards North – Open land and Towards South – Khasra No. 21. 3. While the applicant claimed that the Plot No. B, Indora Housing Accommodation Scheme, NIT, Khasra No. 56, 57/1, 57/2, 58 of Mouza-Mankapur, Ward No. 57, Division-North, Tahsil and Registration Sub-District & District-Nagpur, admeasuring 1431.75 sq.mtrs (equivalent to 15411.35 sq.ft) which is bounded by; Towards North – NIT Housing Scheme, Towards South – Nalla, Towards East - Road and Towards West – Open land and Railway Line was sold in favour of father of applicant by auction for consideration of Rs. 88,51,000/- and yearly ground rent of Rs. 1,77,020/- is also paid to NIT by duly executed and registered indenture of lease dated 22/02/2008. 4. It is case of the applicant that non-applicant no. 1 Shri. Laxman s/o Pralhad Somkunwar has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 873/2008 against the father of applicant namely Premchand Chawla 3 and Nagpur Improvement Trust before 8th Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur which is pending while another Regular Civil Suit No. 1563/2004 was filed by non-applicant against Nagpur Improvement Trust on 21/09/2006 which was decreed by Civil Judge Junior Division, Court No. 9, Nagpur declaring Laxman Pralhad Somkunwar is owner of suit property Khasra No. 19, at Mouza Jaripatka, admeasuring 0.34 HR in Tahsil & District Nagpur. 5. According to the applicant the decree was obtained fraudulently by playing fraud upon the Court on the basis of alleged certified copy of the “Gift Deed” while original document of “Gift Deed” was not produced in the Court, and it is revealed in the course of the investigation that no such “Gift Deed” document no. 1079 was ever registered in the office of Sub-Registrar No. 1, Nagpur City, Nagpur on 11/12/1986, copy of which is annexed as “R-2” with Affidavit in Reply. 6. Thus, according to respondent-State prima facie the non- applicant no. 1 obtained decree on the basis of forged and fabricated documents (In view of the contents of letter from Sub-Registrar No. 1, Nagpur City, Nagpur). There also appears dispute as to measurement of Khasra No. and Mouza. The question as to whether 4 decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 1563/2004 on 21/09/2006 is nullity or not may be considered by Competent Civil Court since it appears that Regular Civil Suit No. 873/2008 is pending between applicant’s father and non-applicant no. 1 before 8th Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur, in which applicant can join as party. It is informed that, Nagpur Improvement Trust is also party to that suit. The accusations made in the complaint by the applicant can be dealt with on merits by the learned trial Magistrate concerned since it is contended that the charge-sheet is already filed in respect of alleged offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 471 of Indian Penal Code for the alleged complaint. If charge-sheet is already filed then it is for the accused who had obtained the anticipatory bail; to move for regular bail in the trial Court and the trial Court can pass an appropriate order according to law. The order in the nature of anticipatory bail granted in favour of Shri. Laxman Pralhad Somkunwar can survive till the filing of charge sheet against him and he is at liberty to move for regular bail in the trial Court. Leaned APP stated that charge-sheet is filed two months back, that being so, I am not inclined to pass any further order. 7. The order dated 07/06/2010 passed by the learned 5 Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-4, Nagpur in Misc. Criminal Application No. 897/2010, in Laxman V/s. State of Maharashtra is quashed and set aside as it can not survive since it is open for the non-applicant no. 1 to move the trial Court concerned for regular bail on merits. JUDGE Punde