Cri. Apln. No. 2583/11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2583 OF 2011 Habib Ahmed s/o. Habib Abdulla, R/o. Behind Shahi Masjid, Parbhani, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani. ....Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. S.B. Bhapkar , Advocate for applicant. Mr. G.R. Ingole, APP for State/respondent. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 18th July, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail in Cr. No. 86/2011 registered in Kotwali Police Station, Parbhani for offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 34 etc. of IPC. The papers of investigation were made available. Both the sides are heard. 2. There are allegations made by one Laxmibai that the disputed plot was purchased by one Joty and after the death of Joty, the two minor issues of Joty are living with complainant. She has made allegations that to grab the property, the plot is again now occupied by present applicant and one Maniyar was also found occupying the plot. On the last date, a query was made and APP was asked whether the statement of Maniyar is Cri. Apln. No. 2583/11 2 recorded. Today the statement of Maniyar came to be shown to the Court. He has stated that he purchased the plot from one Abdul Faruk and this plot was again purchased by the present applicant. He has contended that in the year 2006 Abdul Faruk sold the plot to him and he has made the construction and some construction was made by Jyoti, the deceased. He has made allegations against the present applicant that he has deceived many persons in similar manner. 3. There are documents like copy of notarized document titled as agreement made in favour of Maniyar by Abdul Faruk. There is copy of document made in favour of Shaikh Khalil by Maniyar. All the documents are notarized documents. In view of the statement of Maniyar in which there is specific mention that there was the material like meter etc. and that material was taken away, when the possession was given to him and as there is also the contention that he was in difficulty and so he again sold the portion of that plot to the present applicant on 12.3.2011 for the consideration of Rs. 3.3 lacs, custodial interrogation of present applicant is necessary. So the application stands rejected. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2583.11