1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORTY BAIL APPLICATION NO.601 OF 2011 Mr. Madan Chavakula ...Applicant. v/s The State and Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Sachin Pande ,adv. For the Applicant. Mr. Y.S.Shinde, APP For the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. R.C.Kaushik, adv. For the R.No.3. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA,J. DATED : AUGUST 23,2011. P.C. 1 Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in M.E.C.R.No. 2/2007 registered at police station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 341, 420 r/w section 34 of the I.P.C. 2 Offence was registered at the report lodged by the respondent no.3 Ramashankar Yadav, who is said to be owner of gala nos.11 and 12 in the property known as Bramhadin compound. These two galas or rooms were originally rented out in favour of one M.B.Swamy. After his death, his sons, who are the accused nos.1 and 2 in the complaint continued that business in the said premises and were also paying rent. It was transpired that when the 2 complainant had gone to his native place, sons of M.B.Swamy inducted the present applicant, who is accused no.3 as licensee. Thereafter, later on, in the year 2003, it was revealed that the applicant in collusion with the sons of M.B.Swamy got executed forged document in his name and on the basis of that he also secured loan from Veerseva Co-operative Bank mortgaging the suit property. The said bank started proceedings for recovery of the amount and secured recovery certificate issued by the society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. As the property of the complainant is shown to have been mortgaged by the applicant while obtaining loan, the complainant and his property have come in trouble and the said property has been sealed. It appears that the applicant had previously filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, which was rejected on 2.2.2008. According to the prosecution, even after rejection of the anticipatory bail, he was never available and in spite of his search at different places including 3 Silvassa where he used to carry on business earlier as well as at Surat, he could not be traced. Applicant is shown to be absconding in the said criminal case. As the applicant was absconding , police filed A Summary, even though prima-facie case was made out. The learned APP on instructions makes a statement that police will re-open the case and file charge-sheet against him as soon as applicant is arrested, . 3 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances noted above, in my opinion, it is not fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 4 Therefore, application stands rejected. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)