1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.132 OF 2011 Amar Radhakishan Jagiasi ...Applicant. v. State ...Respondents. WITH INTERVENTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2011 Amar Radhakishan Jagiasi ...Applicant. v. State ...Respondents. AND Shri Ravi K. Talreja ...Intervenor/Org.Complt. AND CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.155 OF 2011 1 Kishan Jamandas Chandwani 2 Jyoti Kishan Chandwani ...Applicants. v/s. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent WITH INTERVENTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2011 1 Kishan Jamandas Chandwani 2 Jyoti Kishan Chandwani ...Applicants. v/s. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr.P.R.Arjunwadkar ,adv. For the Applicants. Smt.P.P.Shinde, APP For the Respondent/State. Shri V.N.Tayade, adv. For the Intervenor. 2 CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 15, 2011. P.C. 1 Intervention applications are filed by the original complainant to oppose the bail applications filed by the accused persons. In the interest of justice, both the applications be registered and they are allowed. 2 Heard. Admittedly deceased Bhawansingh, who was grandfather of the complainant Ravi Talreja was owner of plot no.16 admeasuring about 422.75 sq.mtr. It appears that out of said plot, he had transferred 1760 sq.ft. in favour of his grandson Rajesh, who is brother of the complainant. Even though the original sale deed dated 15.2.1989 was not registered nor it was on the proper stamp paper, fresh registered deed was executed on 23.7.1997 to validate that transaction. Rajesh sold that piece of land to Sushil Talreja, who in turn sold to one Manuja, from whom applicants Jyoti Chandwani and her husband Kishan Chandwani purchased. Purchasers Kishan Chandwani and Jyoti Chandwani, who are accused and applicants submitted an application seeking permission to make construction on 163.88 sq.mtrs. land. 3 According to the complainant, on the area of 303.27 sq.mtr. 3 out of the total plot of 422.75 sq.mtr. construction was made as per the permission obtained on 19.3.1995 and thus, only 119.48 sq.mtr. FSI was available. According to him, Jyoti and Kishan fraudulently prepared the plan with the help of an architect, structural engineer and certain officers of the Municipal Corporation and secured permission for construction on the 163.88 sq.mtrs. and thus, they have encroached upon his share in the land. On the basis of these allegations, in the report lodged by the complainant, crime no.10 of 2011 was registered at Vithalwadi police station under Sections 420, 467, 468 r/w section 34 and 120B of the I.P.C. Applicants in criminal application no.155 of 2011 are Kishan and Jyoti, who are purchasers of the land, which was transferred by Bhavansingh to his grandson Rajesh. In Bail Application No.132 of 2011, applicant Amar Jagiasi is structural engineer, who had given certificate about the structural fitness of proposed construction. It appears that the complainant has also filed a civil suit, which is pending. 4 Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances noted above, there is a dispute as to whether accused persons have falsely obtained permission for construction to the extent of excess 44.40 sq.mtrs. In view of the facts noted above, it basically appears to be civil dispute between the parties. Any way I do not find any reason to refuse 4 bail to the accused persons. 5 For the aforesaid reasons, accused/applicants be released on their executing PR of Rs.10,000/- each with surety in the like amount with condition that they shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. 6 Both the applications and intervention applications stand disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)