1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3870 OF 2009 Anna Savalaram Patil ....... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil adv. for the Applicant Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 11th September,2009. P. C.: 1. The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with C.R. No.37/09 registered with Neral police station, District Raigad, for offence punishable under sections 406, 417, 419, 420, 467 read with 34 of IPC, hence moved the present application for anticipatory bail. 2. A private complaint came to be filed by one Ashwin Liladhar Shah stating therein that he and his wife were desirous of purchasing a land which was adjacent to the complainant’s land. The adjacent land was owned by one Mahadu Rama Borade,. The complaint was not aware that Mahadu Rama Borade had expired. The co-accused are stated to have represented to the complainant/his power of attorney holder that Mahadu Rama 2 Borade was desirous of selling the land and they produced a fake person as the owner of the land by name Mahadu Rama Borade. The person who was produced as Mahadu Rama Borade is original accused no.5. The present applicant is not named in the FIR. However, on the very next day the complainant’s supplementary statement came to be recorded and therein he has stated that the present applicant at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed had produced the original accused no.5 as Mahadu Rama Borade viz, the dead person. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, failure to name the present applicant in the FIR would be fatal in this case. In his submission in the supplementary statement, the name of the applicant has been inserted with a view to co-erce him to shell out money, taking advantage of the fact that the applicant is respected in the area and is a gram panchayat member. It is also stated that his wife as well is a gram panchayat member. The complainant admittedly was not present when the sale deed was executed and registered and hence whatever he has stated in the supplementary statement will not carry any weight. However the power of attorney holder of the complainant by name Arun Rama Bhagat has also in his statement referred the present applicant as the person who produced accused no.5 as Mahadu Rama Borade. Even the statement of the stamp vendor refers to the present applicant as the person present in the company of other co-accused and is stated to be present when the documents was submitted for registration. Thus there is material on record to connect the 3 present applicant with the crime. 3. The learned APP has placed on record a report wherein it is stated that a similar crime has been registered against the present applicant prior to the filing of the instant complaint. The other crime is bearing No. 38/09 registered for offence under section 420, 471, 416 of IPC etc. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, in my view this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence application is rejected. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)