1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3615 OF 2010 Mr. Amol Madhukar @ S.N. Gharat.... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3616 OF 2010 Mr. Ravindra Ganesh Kunte .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. Ganesh Gole, Advocate for applicants. Mrs. P.H. Kantharia, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 24th August, 2010 P.C. 1.1. The applicants in these two applications were at the relevant time The applicants in these two applications were at the relevant time working as Nayab Tahsildar and Talathi. They apprehend arrest in working as Nayab Tahsildar and Talathi. They apprehend arrest in connection with C.R. No.54 of 2010 registered with Karjat Police Station connection with C.R. No.54 of 2010 registered with Karjat Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 463, 464, 465, 468, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 463, 464, 465, 468, 471, 167 read with 34 Indian Penal Code. It has been alleged that the 471, 167 read with 34 Indian Penal Code. It has been alleged that the applicants along with few other persons mutated entries in the name of applicants along with few other persons mutated entries in the name of 2 private individuals on the basis of fabricated documents pertaining to private individuals on the basis of fabricated documents pertaining to survey no.9/3, which is a government land. It has been contended on survey no.9/3, which is a government land. It has been contended on behalf of the applicants that on receiving the application from the other behalf of the applicants that on receiving the application from the other co-accused persons for incorporating the names in 7/12 extracts of the co-accused persons for incorporating the names in 7/12 extracts of the property, verification of the documents accompanying the application i.e. property, verification of the documents accompanying the application i.e. Akarphod Patrak issued by the office of Taluka Inspector and Land Akarphod Patrak issued by the office of Taluka Inspector and Land Record was done and there was no reason for the applicants to doubt Record was done and there was no reason for the applicants to doubt the genuineness of the documents. The applicants had no knowledge the genuineness of the documents. The applicants had no knowledge that the documents were forged and fabricated and therefore, they that the documents were forged and fabricated and therefore, they cannot be said to have committed any offence. It is contended that at cannot be said to have committed any offence. It is contended that at the highest, it can be said to be negligent in performing their duties. the highest, it can be said to be negligent in performing their duties. Considering the nature of the allegations made and the facts of the case, Considering the nature of the allegations made and the facts of the case, in my opinion, this is not the case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, in my opinion, this is not the case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the applications are rejected. the applications are rejected. ( Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)