1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.575 OF 2011 Shri Bhanudas Radhu Chaudhari .... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent. Mr. Rahul Kate, Advocate for applicant Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for respondent. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Date : 13th July, 2011 P.C. 1. The applicant files this second application for anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in C.R. No.103 of 2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 468, 471, 477-A read with 34 Indian Penal Code. The first application for anticipatory bail of the applicant made to the Sessions Court was dismissed by the order dated 30th June 2011. 2. The F.I.R. is lodged by one Bhanudas Shahu Salve serving as Extension Officer, Panchayat Samittee, Baramati. It alleges that 2 percolation tank of the Gram Panchayat was to be repaired. Initially, the work of repairs was entrusted to one Uddhav Nivrutti Sawant on 28th January 2010 by passing necessary Resolution by the Gram Panchayat and that he executed the work to the extent of 80 to 85%. However, on 21st May 2010, the Gram Panchayat cancelled the work order. It thereafter showed as if entire work was done by it and by forging the documents collected an amount of Rs. 1,49,976/- from the Government. After collecting the amount, it prepared bills showing expenditure of Rs.1,39,500/-. The complaint alleges that the applicant herein and the Gram Sevak have misappropriated the amount of Rs.1,39,500/- by preparing forged documents. Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in fact innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the complaint due to political rivalry. He submits that Mr. Uddhav Sawant has already filed an application for dis- qualification of the applicant. He further points out that the applicant being the resident of village Vadhane, Tal. Baramati, there are no chances of his absconding or not being available for the investigation. 3. After the complaint was made by Uddhav Sawant, the Extension Officer conducted an enquiry into the complaint and noticed that 3 the work has allegedly been completed on 30th September 2010, but the receipts produced for purchase of the building material were of subsequent date. The Register for the purchase and use of the building material is not properly maintained. The cheque dated 9th October 2010 in the sum of Rs.15,600/- was encashed by the applicant herein, wherein cash book shows that the amount has been paid to Shri N.B. Transport. Similarly the cheque of Rs. 22,500/- though encashed by the applicant, the cash book refers to one Shri Akshay Transport Walu, as the recipient. There are several other deficiencies noticed by the Extension Officer. Considering the report of the Extension Officer, it cannot be said that applicant is not connected to the offences. Since the allegations relate to fabrication of documents, the custodial interrogation cannot be denied to the Police. Therefore, the application is rejected. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J)