1 ABA 201-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.201 OF 2011 K. Ashraf ..Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr.Anil S. Patel, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.D.A.Nalawade, PP, for the Union Territory of Daman and Dieu Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP, for the Respondent - State Mr.S.V.Marwadi with Mr.V.V.Katti, Advocate, for the original Complainant CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 5TH APRIL, 2011 P.C. . This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person, who apprehends arrest in connection with M.C.R.No.13 of 2010 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Nani Daman Police Station, Daman and who allegedly entered into transactions with the Complainant's firm, first, in the name of his own concern and paid 2 ABA 201-2011 of Rs.11,50,000/- towards the goods purchased. The applicant is, thereafter, alleged to have persuaded the Complainant to sell further goods to another entity known as 'Safa Enterprises' which is owned by the applicant's own brother. Safa enterprises received goods worth Rs.19,83,640/- over a period of time but did not pay a penny. Some of the goods consigned to Safa Enterprises were in fact received by applicant's firm K.E.A enterprises. The complainant filed a complaint in respect of these transactions on 15th May, 2010 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Daman, who ordered investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant apprehends arrest in the offence registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code pursuant to the directions of the CJM, Daman. I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant, the learned Counsel for the original 3 ABA 201-2011 Complainant and the learned PP for the Union Territory of Daman and Diu. Considering the nature of allegations made, it is not clear as to why the applicant, who is not proprietor of Safa Enterprises should be subjected to custodial interrogation. Except for the word of the Complainant, that the applicant led them to believe that he was partner of Safa Enterprises, there is nothing to show that applicant was partner of Safa Enterprises. 2. In view of this, applicant's being in custody for the purpose of investigation into an offence of cheating principally committed may not be necessary. In the event of arrest, he be released on bail on his furnishing P.R.Bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the following conditions. (i) The applicant shall continue to report before the investigating officer for interrogation on every Tuesday between 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Nani Daman Police Station, Daman. 4 ABA 201-2011 (ii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. 4. Criminal Application is disposed of. . The order will remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if charge sheeted the applicant may furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court dated 2nd December, 2010 delivered in Special Leave Petition (Cri.) No.7615 of 2009 (Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State of Maharashtra And Ors.). (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)