1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1025 OF 2010 Zakir Patel Ishaq Patel ..Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra and another. ..Respondents ..... Mr.Shaikh Ashpak T. Patel, Advocate for applicant. Smt.Vaishali Shinde, APP for respondents. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J. DATE : 24th March, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr.Shaikh Ashpak T. Patel, learned Counsel for applicant as well as Smt.Vaishali Shinde, learned A.P.P. for respondents. 2. This is an application preferred by applicant seeking anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with C.R. No.2/2010 registered with Sawda Police Station, Dist.Jalgaon for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 420, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3. It appears that the complainant Digambar Onkar Patil filed private complaint on 31st December, 2009 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Raver against applicant and two co-accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 420, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Raver directed investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is alleged that the applicant and other co-accused persons pretended the complainant that he would be given employment as peon and an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was extracted from him therefor and false order of appointment was given to him, and accordingly, he was deceived and cheated by applicant and co-accused persons. 4. On perusal of the contents of Complaint, it appears that there are specific allegations against applicant in para no.4 thereof and an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- is yet to be recovered. Moreover, on perusal of the investigation papers, statements of some of the witnesses involve applicant in the alleged 3 offence. Apparently, offence is of serious nature and considering the gravity thereof, I am of the view that this is not a fit case to exercise the discretion under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since the custodial interrogation of applicant is necessary. 5. In the result, the application being sans merit, stands dismissed. The interim protection, if any, stands vacated. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE gas/cri1025.10