1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRI.APPLICATION NO.2531 OF 2008. (VASANT CHANDRABHAN NIKAJU Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 02, 2008. 1. Perused case papers and case diary. 2. Heard Shri P.C.Madkholkar, learned Advocate for the applicant and Shri A.S. Sonare, learned A.P.P. for the respondent/ State. 3. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant apprehends arrest in furtherance of Crime No.229/2007, registered with Police Station, Katol, District : Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 427, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal code. 2 4. In the F.I.R. one another person viz. Deelip Satphale, who is Sectional Engineer, is named as accused. 5. It has revealed, during investigation, that accused Deelip Satphale claimed that he has done the entire work almost corresponding to the advance taken by him and also claimed that the present applicant has delivered the building material on the site and furnished bill of one 'Mate Building Material Suppliers' and the payment towards material supplied was collected away by Shri Vasant Nikaju- present applicant. 6. In so far as getting estimate sanctioned for the higher amount than original estimate is not the matter with which the present applicant has any nexus. 7. In so far as the supply by the present applicant in somebody's name and receiving of money by the present applicant is concerned, even accused Deelip Satphale does not complain that there was any deficit supply or overpayment. 8. There is no grievance that the present applicant has not 3 attended the Investigating Officer and that he has been interrogated. 9. In the above circumstances, this Court finds that there are no reasons to refuse to confirm the ad-interim order passed by this Court. 10. In the above premises, interim order passed by this Court on 11.07.2008 is made absolute. 11. The applicant is directed to co-operate with the investigating agency and remain present as and when required by the Investigating Officer. JUDGE RR.