ABA-274-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2011 Shrimant Pandurang Munde ... Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra, Thru' Walchandnagar Police Station, Pune ... Respondent Mr. N.P. Shimpi for the Applicant. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent. Mr. Prashant S. Hagare for the First Informant. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 14 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. I have gone through the F.I.R. The allegation against the Applicant is that he and two others, i.e. Kalpana Somawar and Anil Somawar, came to the First Informant-Rajendra Kadam and represented to him that it would be to his advantage to invest money in Aaryarup Tourism & Club Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. Such representation was, allegedly, repeatedly made by the Applicant and some other persons, who are named as 'accused' in the F.I.R. Believing such representation, the First Informant, along with his friend, went to Pune and handed over an amount of Rs.5 lacs in cash to Kalpana ABA-274-11.sxw 2 Dixit Somawar. The First Informant was told that certain amounts would be credited per day in his account, but as it did not happen, he contacted Anil Somawar and Kalpana Somawar insisting that the amount invested by him should be repaid. Anil Somawar and Kalpana Somawar then gave a cheque, which had been signed by one Ravindra Deshmukh, in the sum of Rs.5,81,334/-, towards the repayment of the First Informant's amount. The said cheque was dishonoured. 3. According to the Applicant, he himself had invested an amount of Rs.26,500/- in the said Company and that his money has also not been repaid by the said Company. He says that prior to the lodging of the F.I.R. in this case, he, himself, had lodged a report with the Police against the said Company, its Directors and Officers. The copy of that F.I.R., bearing No.230 of 2010, dated 30th November, 2010, is annexed to the Anticipatory Bail Application. According to Mr. Hagare, the learned Advocate for the Intervenor, this F.I.R. is bogus and lodged only to claim innocence. 4. Without going deeper into the matter, it is clear that, even as per the averments in the F.I.R., the amount of Rs.5 lacs was not paid to the Applicant. The cheque had also not been given to the First Informant, by the Applicant. It was given by the co-accused - Kalpana Somawar. The said Kalpana Somawar and Anil Somawar have not been arrested. The Applicant is not the signatory of the said cheque. 5. A grievance is made by the learned Advocate for the Intervenor, i.e. the First Informant, that the Applicant has not been attending the Police Station ABA-274-11.sxw 3 Dixit pursuant to the conditions imposed in the order dated 7th April, 2011, by which he was granted interim anticipatory bail. However, as the Investigating Officer is absent, the learned APP is unable to make any comment on this contention. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been attending the Police Station, as directed. 6. Under these circumstances, I think it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicant. 7. The interim order of anticipatory bail passed on 7th April, 2011, is confirmed. 8. The Applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station on 16th June, 2011 and make himself available for investigation / interrogation. 9. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]