1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.852 OF 2010 Dr.Datta S/o.Maroti Dhanve, Age-50 years, Occu-Govt.Service as The In-charge District Malaria/Faliria Officer, Nanded, R/o.Anand Nagar, Nanded, Tq. and Dist. Nanded APPLICANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. The Superintendent of Police, Nanded. RESPONDENTS Mr.A.H.Kapadia with Mr.H.F.Pawar, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.B.V.Wagh, learned APP for respondents. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 06/04/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.235/2009, registered in Vazirabad Police Station of Dist. Nanded. It appears that the present application is moved before this Court by the applicant after his earlier application for anticipatory bail Cri.Appl.No.4432/2009 was unconditionally 2 withdrawn. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, and also learned APP for State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. It appears that the said offence 235/2009 was registered in Wazirabad Police Station on 19/11/2009, on the complaint of one Ratnakar Tukaram Satav. That offence was registered against total 9 persons including the present applicant, for the alleged offence punishable u/s. 420, 468, r/w. 471 of The IPC. During the course of submissions across the bar, certain facts are brought to the notice of this Court, which require serious consideration. It is not under dispute that the applicant is serving as District Malaria Officer since 01/07/2006 with Zillha Parishad, Nanded. Prior to that, he was serving as District Malaria Officer with Hingoli Zillha Parishad. It appears that as a District Malaria Officer, he require to take certain steps for eradication of Malaria and for which he require to appoint certain field workers, whose nomenclature can be as the “Multipurpose Health Workers”. It appears that somewhere in the month of July 2009, an advertisement was published, calling upon the applications for the appointment of Multipurpose Health Workers in the service of Zillha Parishad, Nanded. In the said advertisement, 50% seats were reserved for the candidates, who were holding the experience certificate of working for 90 days or more than 90 days as field workers/multipurpose health workers. It appears that from the applications submitted, 8 candidates have applied under the category 3 and alongwith their applications, produced xerox copies of the experience certificates issued to them at the time of their selection. After the selection of these 8 candidates, who are arrayed as accused no.1 to 8 in the said offence no.235/2009, registered in Wazirabad Police Station, the xerox copies of the experience certificates produced by them, were sent for verification to the issuing authorities. During verification, it revealed that the contents about working days mentioned in those certificates of 5 persons, that information is incorrect information. So far as the certificates produced by 3 candidates by name Gajajnan Shivaji Boinwad, Keshav Vishwambhar Narwade, Mhaske Sham, it revealed that they have not served for a single day as a field worker, even though the certificate was issued in their favour that they have worked for more than 90 days as per the contents of experience certificate. All these certificates were under the purported signature of the present applicant. When this fact came to the notice of the Chairman of the Selection Committee, the Collector, Nanded, he referred the matter to the District Health Officer with a directions to conduct the inquiry and if require, to lodge the complaint against the concerned. In view of this reference by the Chairman, President of the Selection Committee, the Collector concerned, the said offence came to be registered. 4. During the course of submissions across the bar, it is brought to the notice of this Court that before this alleged incident came to the light of the day, in the month of April 2008, show cause notice 4 was issued to the applicant about the complaint received against him that he had issued certain experience certificate which are false and bogus. This notice was replied initially on 22/07/2008 by the present applicant and at the same time, certain information was called for. After receipt of that information, another explanation was submitted vide letter dated 30/01/2009, wherein names of 4 persons were mentioned with the allegations that these 4 persons Mr.Kadam, Mr.More, Mr.Malhari, Mr.Tupkari and Mr.Bodawar, might have run a racket to issue false certificates to the needy persons. It appears that after this explanation was offered vide letter dated 30/01/2009, no further steps were taken in lieu of the show cause notice served on the present applicant. In the said explanation, there is reference that there is possibility of use of purported forged signatures of the applicant as well as the xerox impression of the signatures of applicant were used to prepare false certificates. This incident occurred about 8 months before registration of this offence. In this light, my attention is drawn towards the copies of 8 certificates on record. Out of these 8 certificates, the certificate issued to More Ashok, as well as Gajajnan Shivaji Boinwad were issued in the month of July 2006, after the present applicant has left the charge as District Malaria Officer of Hingoli. It is urged across the bar that in view of the earlier explanation offered dated 30/01/2009, no further action was taken against the applicant. In the premise, false implication of present applicant in this offence can not be rulled out. 5. It is also urged across the bar that the allegations in the 5 complaint against the present applicant are about issuance of bogus experience certificates and for that purpose, it is necessary to verify the signatures on the certificates of those 8 candidates, subject matter of scrutiny, which were sent for verification to the issuing authority. In this regard, the presence of applicant is required only to collect his specimen signature, which is to be referred for the opinion of hand writing expert, and considering the past record, his custodial interrogation is not required as during the period of interim protection given to this applicant, he was never called by the Investigation Officer, either for interrogation or for collection of information from him. 6. While opposing the bail application, it is urged on behalf of the prosecution that since the date of interim protection granted to the applicant, the applicant is not available to the Investigation Agency as he is absconding, which submission is on the basis of report received by learned APP. The applicant is a Government Servant. Whether the applicant is absconding or not, that can be decided on the basis of whether the Investigation Officer have visited the place of service of the applicant and the applicant found not attending the duty. Nothing is on record to show that the applicant is not present on duty even though interim protection is granted to him. If the applicant is not reported as absconding from duty, it can not be said that the applicant is absconding. On further specific query that, whether the applicant was summoned by the Investigation Officer to face the interrogation, to which no record is made available. 6 7. While considering the application for anticipatory bail u/s. 438 of Cr.P.C., the nature of accusation require to be considered. In this particular case, the allegation against the present applicant is that he has issued bogus certificates under his signature. No doubt, the certificates on record, but they are xerox copies and not the original. The fact reflected about the contents of these xerox copies of the certificates are not correct, based on the verification report. Considering the period when the complaint is lodged and the protest at the hands of the applicant about 8 months prior to the said complaint that there is racket working in the Department, who are using the purporting false signatures of present applicant for issuance of certificates to the needy persons, and they are using those certificates to secure the job. This explanation was offered months together before lodging of the complaint. Considering this aspect, as after this explanation, no action was initiated against the applicant, possibility of his false implication in the present offence can not be rulled out and if it is so, it is not necessary that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required as urged by the prosecution. In the result, following is the order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. The interim protection earlier granted to the applicant, vide order dated 3/3/2010 was extended from time to time, and is in force till today, to continue till filing of the charge sheet. 3. During this period, if required, applicant to attend the office of the Investigation Officer, whenever called on written requisition. 7 4. Applicant not to tamper or contact with the prosecution witnesses. 5. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/APRIL 2010/cri.appl.852-10