1 BA 684 OF 2011 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.684 OF 2011 Shreyas Pratap s/o Vikrant Pratap .. Applicant -versus B. R. Sharma and ors .. Respondents. Mr. B. B. Tiwari, for the applicant. Mrs. S. D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent State. Mr. M.K.Kocharekar for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 26th September, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the respondents by this Court, by order dated 27th April, 2010. Learned Counsel for the applicant may be right in submitting that the respondent had forged power of attorney on the basis of which, they got sale deed registered in their name, in respect of property of village Kaman when the power of attorney originally given was in respect of land at village. Bhuigaon. Learned counsel for the applicant may also be right in submitting that without the forged power of attorney being made available the investigation may not proceed. However, it is difficult to conceive that the allegedly forged document may be retained by the respondents. In para 3 of the application for bail, applicants i.e. respondents herein 2 BA 684 OF 2011 had stated that the power of attorney was part of the transaction and “document is parted with Sub Registrar” at the time of registration of the sale deed. Therefore, subjecting the respondents’ to custodial interrogation, is unlikely to yield the power of attorney in respect of which they have already made allegedly a false claim. Though the learned counsel may have excellent grounds for submitting that the respondents have used false and forged power of attorney for getting sale deed executed, cancellation of bail granted, or subjecting the respondents custodial interrogation is unlikely to yield anything. In view of this application is rejected. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)