Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Ashok Uddhav More vs State Of Maharashtra on 30 April, 2024

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

2024:BHC-AS:20064



                                                                 1/4                      12-ABA-1066-24.odt

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1066 OF 2024

                             Ashok Uddhav More                                     .... Applicant

                                       versus

                             The State of Maharashtra                              .... Respondent
                                                                   .......

                             •     Mr. Mahindra Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant.
                             •     Mr. Avinash A. Naik, APP for the State/Respondent.

                                                         CORAM     : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                                                         DATE      : 30th APRIL, 2024

                             P.C. :


                             1.             The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection

                                  with C.R.No.664/2023, dated 28/12/2023, registered with Vitha

                                  Police Station, Sangli, under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471,

                                  474 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.



                             2.             Heard Mr. Mahindra Deshmukh, learned counsel for

                                  the Applicant and Mr. Avinash A. Naik, learned APP for the

                                  State.
             Digitally
             signed by
             MANUSHREE
   MANUSHREE NESARIKAR
   NESARIKAR Date:
             2024.05.02
             16:52:17
             +0530




                 Nesarikar


                          ::: Uploaded on - 02/05/2024                     ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2024 00:49:02 :::
                                  2/4                        12-ABA-1066-24.odt

 3.               The FIR is lodged by one Vikas Shinde. He has stated

      that he wanted to purchase the land from the present Applicant

      who was the owner of Gat No.400 admeasuring 23.83 R at

      Bhalavni. The sale price was fixed at Rs.35 lakhs. The informant

      paid Rs.32,50,000/-. But subsequently, the Applicant did not

      respond. Instead, he sold the same land to his own uncle Maruti

      Kalkute, through a sale deed dated 11/02/2022. The informant

      already had agreement for sale in his favour in respect of that

      land and inspite of accepting money, the said land was sold by

      the Applicant to his uncle. On this basis, the FIR is lodged.



 4.               Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the

      informant had filed a suit for specific performance before Civil

      Judge Senior Division at Vitha. The suit was decreed exparte.

      The Applicant had not appeared. Now the matter is at the stage

      of execution. The Applicant was always ready and willing to

      repay the money which he had taken. Learned counsel for the

      Applicant invited my attention to ground (c) in paragraph No.4

      wherein he has stated that the Applicant was ready to repay the

      consideration amount accepted from the complainant pursuant




::: Uploaded on - 02/05/2024                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2024 00:49:02 :::
                                   3/4                       12-ABA-1066-24.odt

      to the agreement for sale dated 11/08/2021. Learned counsel

      submitted that the Applicant is consistent on his stand that he

      was willing to refund the money, but the informant is not willing

      to accept that amount. He submitted that it is thus a civil dispute

      and no criminal offence is made out.



 5.               Learned APP submitted that the the Applicant had used

      backdated stamp paper to create the document in favour of his

      uncle to deprive the informant of his legitimate right in respect

      of that land.



 6.               I have considered these submissions. The dispute has

      travelled to a Civil Court and an exparte decree is already passed

      in favour of the informant. The matter pertains to the

      documentary evidence. A competent Court has already passed

      the decree in his case. Learned counsel for the Applicant has

      relied on the averments in this application, as mentioned in

      paragraph No.4(c). The Applicant has shown willingness to

      refund the money.




::: Uploaded on - 02/05/2024                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2024 00:49:02 :::
                                          4/4                         12-ABA-1066-24.odt

 7.               In this view of the matter, custodial interrogation will

      not serve any purpose. The matter appears to be civil in nature.



 8.               Hence, the following order :



                                          ORDER

(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R.No.664/2023, dated 28/12/2023, registered with Vitha Police Station, Sangli, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation.

(iii) The application stands disposed of accordingly.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 02/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2024 00:49:02 :::