- 1 - form rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.486 OF 2011 with CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 400 OF 2011 Rajendra Bholabhai Patel .. Applicant vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr.S.V.Marvadi i.b Mr.Balaji Gadi for Applicant Ms.Sartaj Shaikh for Applicant in Cri.Appln.No. 400/2011 Ms.P.P.Shnde APP for State CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J DATE: 17 th August 2011 P.C. 1. Heard. Criminal Application No.400 of 2011 filed by the original complaint Altaf Yusuf Sheikh to intervene in the anticipatory bail Application is allowed in the interest of justice and stands disposed of. 2. Perused the relevant papers. The Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in C.R.No.16 of 2011 registered with Cyber crime police station Bombay under sections 465, 467, 471,420 read with section 34 IPC and under section 66, 73,74 of Information and Technology Act upon a complaint lodged by complainant Altaf Yusuf Shaikh i.e. the Intervenor. - 2 - form The Complainant claims to be a director of Abu Raj Resorts Ltd. According to him the present Applicant had resigned from post of director of M/s Abu Raj Resorts Ltd way back in 2003 but inspite of that recently it has been revealed that not only he is shown as a Director but he has also introduced other persons as Directors of the firm using forged digital signatures of the company and thereby he has committed said offences. The Complainant was introduced and brought as a Director in the year 2006 by one Ambalal Soni who had resigned from the post of Director in September,2003. According to the accused-Applicant he himself had never resigned from the post of director and forged documents were filed by the complainant to get the name of the Applicant deleted from the post of Director. He had also filed counter complaint that the Complainant could not have been brought as a Director by Ambalal Soni in 2006 because, Ambalal Soni himself had resigned in the year 2003. All these disputes are pending before the Company Law Board. The Company Law Board would be called upon to decide as to who are the Directors and who are not. Learned counsel for the Applicant contends that as a Director of the Company he himself has lodged a complaint under section 138 - 3 - form of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the brother of Ambalal Soni in respect of a bounced cheque for Rs 5 crores. The prosecution case does not go beyond the allegations that the Applicant has wrongly shown himself as a Director and has used digital signature. That question is very much in dispute before the competent authority. In the present case, the Applicant was directed by this Court on 7.6.2011 to attend Cyber Crime police station on every day from 9.6.2011 and make himself available for interrogation. Learned counsel for the Applicant makes a statement that the Applicant has been regularly attending Cyber Crime police station and he has been interrogated and the learned APP, after taking instructions from the concerned Officer also admits it. 3. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, the custodial interrogation is not necessary for investigation of the case. 4. Therefore, in the event of arrest in C.R.No.16 of 2011 the Applicant be released on his executing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in - 4 - form the like amount with the condition that he shall attend Cyber Crime police station, Mumbai as and when required for the purpose of interrogation and shall cooperate in the investigation. He shall not tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner. J.H.BHATIA, J