1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.809 OF 2010 Mr. Munir Khan )..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent ---- Mr. A. P. Mundargi Sr. Advocate i/by Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. A. S. Gadkari APP for the State. Mr.Mahesh Vaswani for intervenor in Cr.Application Nos.97/2010 & 164/2010. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 20th April, 2010 PC 1 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant is shown as an accused in C.R.No.132 of 2009 registered by the Versova police station for alleged offences under Sections 328, 274, 275, 276, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 420 of IPC. The offence is also registered under sections 33 & 36 of the Maharashtra Medical Practitioner Act, 1961. The crime is registered on a FIR of one Mr. Potdar in which he has stated that on watching an television advertisement, he was impressed by the applicant and his medicine. His wife was having a vision problem. He therefore, approached the applicant and was sold a bottle of medicine for Rs.15,000/-. According to him after taking the medicine, the condition of his wife is worsened and she lost her vision. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the complaint of Mr. Potdar is for with a motive of black-mail. My attention is drawn to the fact that earlier FIR has been filed against the said Potdar and one of his friend Vajir Husein for extortion. The police have registered the crime and I am informed that Potdar 2 has himself obtained anticipatory bail. 2 The investigation has however proceeded much further and according to the Public Prosecutor, about 65 persons had given statements that the so called medicine sold by the applicant has not benefited them. They state that they paid a large amount for that medicine. Investigating officer Kalpana Yashwant Gadekar has filed a detailed affidavit in this Court affirmed on 15.3.2010. She has stated that apart from the statements of 65 witnesses, 116 complaints have been lodged with the Versova police station alleging that they have been cheated by the applicant who has charged exorbitant amounts resulting in no curing of the disease. The statements of five persons have also been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. So even assuming for a moment that the contention of the applicant that Mr.Potdar has a tainted motive is accepted, the matter has travelled much beyond and there are other persons who have come forward to complain against the present applicant. Investigating officer has stated that the applicants along with his associates have entered into a conspiracy and committed a fraud on gullible people from every strata of society, who were suffering with some or the other incurable disease, by giving false promises and by representing to the said people through electronic media, that the applicant can cure any incurable disease and has thus duped them for valuable consideration. I have seen pamphlets on record which indicate that the alleged medicine “body revival” can cure cancer even at the final stage. Advocate for the applicant states that for that, he has been investigated separately. The fact remains that even assuming that a separate earlier prosecution is pending, every time such an ineffective concoction is sold and money is taken, it amounts to the commission of a fresh offence. Investigating officer has indicated that initially for 10 years, applicant was calling himself a Doctor. Counsel for the applicant 3 states that the applicant has stopped using the prefix `Doctor’ after the crime was registered. He now claims to be a Scientist. It is an admitted position that the applicant has no any degree. There is no pre-sale trial on human beings. No special research qualification or expertise has been shown to me by the learned Counsel for the applicant. 3 It was then contended that the applicant has obtained a license from Kota, State of Rajasthan for manufacturing drugs from April-2008. Investigating officer find out that while furnishing information for obtaining the said license, the applicant has given names of Kailash Dutta and Bhavani Shankar as technical staff. Investigating officer has recorded the statement of Kailash and though Kailash is an Ayurvedic Doctor, he claims never to have known about the applicant. There is a contention that the signature of Kailash does not tally with his other signatures. The person by name Bhavani Shankar could not be traced. It was contended on behalf of the applicant that the drug which was being sold was not harmful to the body. The question is whether it is effective for curing any ailment. Even if an unharmful substance is sold by making false promises, that in my view, it would amount to offence under section 420 of IPC. Investigating officer stated that there is a “Munir Khan Cancer Trust” and he was marketing his own medicines through the trust. The applicant has opened two bank accounts and large amounts have been deposited into these accounts and utilised by the applicant for his own benefit and not for the purposes of the trust. 4 After noticing these facts, I may mention that in view of highly priced allopathy drugs, people who are suffering from incurable ailment are willing to try anything for getting some relief. This appears to have created a market for sale of certain concoctions 4 which are termed as medicines, which may or may not be harmful to the body but which are being marketed without proper clinical trials. The huge cost of obtaining proper treatment further permits sale of such concoction at exorbitant rates. This is a practice which cannot be encouraged. This is certainly not a case for anticipatory bail. Police are required to get an un-earth investigation about the money which have been taken from the persons who have been cheated. Application for anticipatory bail is therefore, rejected. 5 It is however, made clear that the observations made in this order will not be used by the Court at the stage of hearing of any regular bail application, as and when such an application is made or even at the stage of trial. Counsel states that the applicant has been on interim anticipatory bail and that he may be given some time to surrender. The applicant may not be arrested till 26.4.2010. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 5