Abdul Sajed S/O Abdul Sattar vs The State Of Maharashtra

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 2

VERSUS

1. The State of Maharashtra

2. The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad. .. RESPONDENTS.

... Shri V.J. Dixit, Sr. Counsel with Shri N.S. Ghanekar, Advocate for applicant. Shri S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for State.

Shri P.F. Patni, Advocate to assist APP. ... ig &

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.208 OF 2011.

Shaikh Ibrahim Patel s/o Shaikh Hussain Patel, age 51 years, occu. agril., r/o Naigaon,

Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad, at present residing at

Fajalpura, Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. .. APPLICANT.

VERSUS

1. The State of Maharashtra through Begampura Police Station, Aurangabad.

2. The Superintendent of Police,

Aurangabad. .. RESPONDENTS.

... Shri Rajendra Deshmukh, Advocate for applicant. Shri S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for State. Shri S.G. Ladda, Advocate to assist APP. ...

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 3

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE,J.

1st FEBRUARY, 2011.

PER COURT:

1. These three applications have been filed

by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in

connection with CR No.157/2010 registered at

Begampura Police Station, Aurangabad for

offence punishable under Sections 384, 420,

468, 504 r.w. 34 of I.P.C.

2. All the three applicants herein filed bail

petitions before the Additional Sessions

Judge-4, Aurangabad. By order dated 11.1.2011,

their applications came to be rejected.

Hence, these applications seeking anticipatory

bail.

3. The complainant Kadari Anwar s/o Kadari

Jahoor, r/o Patel Planet, Jatwada Road,

Aurangabad lodged complaint dated 14.12.2010

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 4

with Begampura Police Station, Aurangabad. The

English translation of the said complaint, as

is supplied by the prosecution, reads thus:

"Date : 14/12/2010

COMPLAINT (FROM MARATHI TO ENGLISH)

I, Quadri Anwar S/o Quadri Zahoor

Ahmed, Age : 34 yrs Occupation- Business, R/o Patel Planet Jatwada Road, Aurangabad lodge complaint before the P.S. Begampura.

I reside along with my family at

above mentioned address and do plotting business. My brother namely Ifteqar

Quadri run the business in the name of Pragati Pvt. Ltd., I purchased the land situated at Himayat Nagar, Tq-Dist. Aurangabad survey no. 19/1 from its

undisputed owner/original owner from 1956 namely Shri Sandu s/o Dhondiba Dube by giving paper publication. Our transaction has been completed by mutual consent and we are taking the benefit of such land. Corporator Abdul Sajed Abdul Sattar do not

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 5

have any concerned with said land.

In Oct. 2010 I can't remember the date, in morning near about 11 to 12. Coporator Abdul Sajed Abdul Sattar called

me and my brother by phone and asked to meet him at his home Chelipura, there he told that the land which you have

purchased you have done illegal

transaction and if you want to do plotting in green belt, you will have to pay me Rs.

25,00,000/- other wise people of corporation on my direction will lodge FIR & false complaint & restrained you and

your brother from doing business. In your sale deed my friend namely Khalil has

attached Fabricated N.A. and if same is given to the police, they will take action against you, saying this if you will not

pay me money, you will face the consequences and in like manner threatened me. I was afraid of the threat given to me

by Abdul Sajed Abdul Sattar and we asked him we need time to think & grant us the time. That to think & grant us the time. That after also we do not paid him extortion amount due to this they published false news in the daily news paper Aurangabad times & Aurangabad

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 6

Express and influenced me by preparing the fabricated G.P.A. of Saeed Bin Salam in

the name of Ibrahim Patel with an expectation that I will give money.

Person of corporator Abdul Sajed Abdul Sattar namely Sk. Raees Shaikh Razzak went to various offices and

collected the personal documents and by showing ig the said faults concerned demands the money of extortion & to the person

to us also threatened that give the money to Sajed Builder as per his demand other wise it will go hard to you. Then after

also the persons of Sajed Builders continued to threatened and demanding the

extortion and as I had not given them the extortion money, on 12/11/2010 at 3.00 p.m. building officer of corporation

namely Sangewar came along with 20 to 25 persons and without any prior intimation & any notice or the Government Order,

assaulted the labours at the plot and took the articles of the shed which was there for the purpose to give the shelter to the labour with them.

Abdul Sajed Builder in the meeting of standing committee in the first week of

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 7

December without any proof raised the question that our land belongs to

corporation & also published the fake & fabricated news in the daily news paper and to influenced us by sending town

planning and development officer & building officer Sangewar, Shaikh Kader and Anwar Khan repeatedly. Amongst them

building officer Anwar Khan used to come

and

at our land by the order of Sajid Builder used to tell, that you meet to

Corporator. Abdul Sajid Builder and give them the money as per their demand and get your issue solved.

Thereafter building inspector Anwar

Khan and Shaikh Kadar without giving me any explanation and prior notice, took with them the six iron poles which were

erected in my field. My watchmen Azim Khan Hayat Khan informed me about the incidence and on account of his information. I from

my mobile phone called to Building Inspector Anwar his mobile phone he told me that we will negotiate and told to come at the garage of Rashid Bhai near collector office Masjid & hence we both brother went there in the evening. He informed us how his and Sajed Builders

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 8

extortion transaction works, and told us to give the money to Sajed Builder as per

demand, he is dangerous person. Than after we both brothers met him two to three times and he used to inform from his phone

to Sajed Builder about the negotiations of meeting. As decided in the said meeting we through the mediation of Anwar Khan on

10/12/2010 while going to house of Abdul

Sajid Abdul Sattar, Chelipura expectations to get solved the matter by with

request, I brought Rs. 1000000 (ten lakhs) with me and negotiated with him and handed over the said amount to him. Before taking

the said amount Sajed Builder from, his mobile called there Corporator Abdul Rauf

alias Khalil Khan, Ibrahim Patel and Shaikh Raees Abdul Razzak who were his companions helped him in the matter & all

of them discussed with me. I requested to finish the matter in the amount of Rs. 1000000 which I was handed over to them

but they told me that we will discuss again on the matter on 12/12/2010 on Sunday. On 12/12/2010 in afternoon on Second Meeting. Corporator Sajed Builder thinking that I am afraid from him told me that you have to pay Rs. 700000/- and told that the said amount in the said matter

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 9

they made fabricated N.A. of my land and he has to distribute to Shaikh Raees Abdul

Razzak, Shaikh Ibrahim Patel who helped him in the matter and shown me the documents of properties and files of

income tax of different persons and the fabricated N.A. of my land and narrated that how he traps the people. As Sajed

Builder demanded me the huge amount and it

after

was not possible for me to give and hence also he will tease me in like

manner, hence I with an intention to get caught him red-handed while accepting the extorted money, proceeded to negotiate

further.

On 13/12/2010 afternoon at about 2 p.m. Anwar Khan called me on phone and asked me my address and came at my home

and explained me to give the 7000000 and told to give Rs. 2000000 from the said amount on 14/12/2010 and went out. I have

recorded all the negotiations of meeting and also of repeated calls of Anwar Khan and also given the complaint in police station against him.

As was decided yesterday, from the demanded extortion amount of 7000000/-

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 10

Anwar Khan on 14/12/2010 was to come and I was not with the intention to give, I came

to police station Begampura and informed about the said to the police inspector Shri Lahane he informed his seniors.

I am not willing to give the extortion amount and I want to caught red

handed accepting the extortion amount.

Hence I prepared bundle of Rs. 20 Lakhs which like it in the manner. I used Rs.

40,000/- to which I kept Rs. One Thousand Note at top and at the bottom and in between the blank papers of the size of

notes. In this I prepared 20 bundles, I informed this on the account of this

information police called Two Panch Witness and informed the staff and planned to arrange the trap and sand me to my

house with the bundles of notes which I have prepared then after at my home in surroundings police arranged the trap. In

afternoon at 12.45 p.m. building inspector of corporation Anwar Khan who was sent by Sajed Builder came to my home, negotiations took place between us and I gave him Rs. 20 Lakh (Twenty Lakh) bundles which I was prepared to give as an extortion money on that only the police

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 11

who were in trap at my home and in surroundings attack & caught Anwar Khan

red handed accepting the extortion amount.

Hence today dated 14/12/10 at 13.05

at my residential house Patel Planet corporator Abdul Sajed Abdul Sattar (Sajid Builder) & his companions namely Anwar

Khan building Inspector Corporation,

Aurangabad, Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh Hussain Patel, Shaikh Raees Abdul Razzak,

Corporator Abdul Rauf Khalil Khan through a conspiracy in my own lands matter prepared fabricated N.A. & demanded the

extortion of Rs. 70,00,000/- ( 70 Lakhs) & from the said amount Anwar Khan building

inspector get caught red handed while accepting the extortion amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-. hence I request to take legal

action against therefore said persons & the persons prepared & fabricated N.A. By above said complaint in returned I read it

is true to the best of my knowledge."

4. The applicant Abdul Sajed s/o Abdul

Sattar, who has filed Criminal application No.

190 of 2011 seeking anticipatory bail, has

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 12

contended in his application that he is

elected Corporator of Municipal Corporation,

Aurangabad and member of the Standing

Committee and they raised issue regarding the

said property in Standing Committee on

6.12.2010 and his intention is to protect the

property of the Government i.e. Aurangabad

Municipal Corporation. According to him, due

to illegal acts of one Sandu Dhondiba Dube and

the complainant, he had filed several

complaints / applications to several

Government Authorities to take appropriate

action against them. It is his contention

that the complaint is filed against him with

an intention to malign his image in the

society and in order to attack his social

status. According to him, no specific

allegation is levelled against him in the

F.I.R., he is a reputed person in the society

being elected Corporator of the Municipal

Corporation, Aurangabad.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 13

5. Another Applicant Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussein Patel has contended that he is General

Power of Attorney holder of Sayyadbin Salem,

who sold 7 acres 7 gunthas land to Sandu

Dhondiba Dube and his brother. According to

him, 2 acres and 30 gunthas land is still in

possession of the legal heirs of Sayyadbin

Salem and he tried to enter the names of the

legal heirs in the revenue record and,

therefore, he has been falsely implicated in

the complaint. He further stated that no

specific allegations are levelled against him

in the F.I.R. According to him, nothing has

been recovered from him and he is a reputed

person in the society. Therefore, he prayed

for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Another applicant namely, Abdul Rauf @

Khalilkhan has contended that the case of the

complainant is highly improbable regarding

ransom as alleged in the F.I.R. There is no

specific allegation in the F.I.R. against him.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 14

He contended that nothing has been recovered

from him and he is falsely involved in the

crime.

7. The learned Counsel Mr. V.D. Sapkal,

appearing for the applicant Abdul Sajed s/o

Abdul Sattar submitted that on 14.12.2010 one

Kadari Anwar Ahmed s/o Kadari Juhur lodged the

complaint in the Begampura Police Station

making allegations that he is dealing in plots

and purchased Sur.No.19/1 from one Sandu

Dhondiba Dube. It is submitted that one

G.P.A. holder of Sayyadbin Salem has filed

complaint on 30th September, 2010 to the

Commissioner of Municipal Corporation and it

was mentioned in the complaint that by using

forged N.A. order, property in green belt

possessed by Sayyadbin Salem is sold. Copy of

the said communication was marked to the

present applicant for raising point in

corporation. The Talathi of Aurangabad issued

communication under the R.T.I. Act on

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 15

11.10.2010 stating that Sandu Dhondiba Dube

has no land in Himayatbag, more particularly,

in Sur No.19/1. The learned Counsel invited

my attention to the said communication, which

is placed on record. It is further submitted

that applicant filed application to the

Registrar on 11.10.2010 requesting to supply

copies of sale deed of Sur.No.19/1. It was

mentioned in the said application that the

property is in green zone and no sale deed can

be executed. On 19.10.2010, the applicant

approached to the District

Collector,Aurangabad requesting to supply

original copy of the N.A. order which was used

by Sandu Dhondiba Dube. On 18.10.2010 the

applicant approached the Assistant Director,

Town Planning requesting to supply of order

dated 6.2.2010 which was referred in the N.A.

order. On 19.10.2010, communication was

received by the applicant from the Assistant

Director, Town Planning stating therein that

the order dated 6.2.2010 is not issued by the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 16

Department and therefore, copy cannot be

given. On 20th October, 2010, the applicant

made complaint to the District Collector

intimating that one Sandu Dhondu Dube is using

forged N.A. order and selling property with

the help of some agent. It was also brought

to his notice that copies of all N.A. Orders

from 1.4.2010 to 18.10.2010 be made available.

It was also mentioned that the Government is

put to loss of crores of rupees and,

therefore, action be taken. On 30th October,

2010 the applicant issued communication to the

Assistant Registrar, requesting him that

copies are not being supplied to him. On

18.11.2010, the applicant issued reminder to

the Collector. On 20.11.2010, the applicant

requested the Administrative Officer of the

Corporation that land of Kham river is being

encroached and, therefore, offence be

registered against the complainant and Sandu

Dhondiba Dube. On 22.11.2010, the applicant

approached to the Administrative Officer

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 17

requesting him that 5 acres land of river i.e.

(Gal Per) is being encroached by the

complainant and one Sandu Dhondiba Dube, bogus

N.A. order is prepared and plots are made,

therefore, offence be registered against the

concerned persons. On 23.11.2010 again he

wrote letter to the Collector stating therein

that when several requests are made, no action

is taken. Therefore, it seems that in

collusion with Officers of the Collectorate,

the complainant is doing illegal business of

plotting and using 5 acres land of

corporation. It is further argued that the GPA

holder of Sayyadbin Salem came to know that

the complainant got prepared forged map and,

therefore, he filed complaint dated

22.11.2010. It is the case of the applicant

that when the corporation authorities were

taking lawful action against the complainant,

the complainant managed the police officers

and brought pressure on corporation. On 25th

November, 2010, there was communication from

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 18

the Police Officer directing the officers of

the Municipal Corporation to remain present.

It is further case of the applicant that there

were several disputes between Sandu Dube and

the complainant and GPA of Sayyadbin Salem

and, therefore, paper publication was issued

through Advocate on 22.11.2010 in almost all

the papers.

ig It was mentioned in the paper

publication that plots are being sold by using

forged N.A. order. It was also mentioned that

the property is in green belt and Sandu Dube

has no property in Survey No.19/1. On

2.12.2010, the present applicant made request

to the Collector that action be taken against

Sandu Dube and the complainant for preparing

forged N.A. order. On 3.12.2010, the present

applicant approached the Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation, making grievance that

the property in green belt is being sold by

the present complainant and Sandu Dube by

using forged N.A. order and, therefore,

offence be registered in City Police Station.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 19

On 4.12.2010, complaint was submitted tothe

Police Station by Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussain. It was mentioned that there is stay

granted by the Deputy Superintendent of Land

Records to the map prepared by him. On

4.12.2010 complaint was made to the

Administrative Officer making grievance that

Anwar Kadari is encroaching on river land as

well as on the land of Corporation. On

4.12.2010, the applicant approached the Police

Commissioner as well as Divisional

Commissioner making reference of his earlier

correspondence and requested for immediate

action. On 5.12.2010 Shaikh Ibrahim

approached the Commissioner of Police and

requested for taking action against the

complainant stating that the property of the

corporation is being grabbed by him with the

help of bogus N.A. order and the same be

stopped immediately.

8. In General Body meeting of the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 20

Corporation, the subject of illegal plots and

encroachment was discussed. The Sabhapati

passed order for registration of crime. On

6th December, 2010, Shaikh Ibrahim approached

to the Commissioner making similar grievance.

The applicant made the grievance in the

meeting on 6.12.2010. It was reflected in the

newspaper dated 7.12.2010. He raised point

that on the basis of forged N.A. order, 115

plots are sold and, therefore, action be

taken. On 7.12.2010 Shaikh Ibrahim

approached to the Commissioner of Police and

requested to lodge criminal complaint in City

Chowk Police Station. On 7.12.2010 the

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation wrote a

letter to the District Collector and informed

that bogus N.A. order is prepared and this

matter falls within the jurisdiction of the

Collectorate. It was requested that F.I.R.

should be registered against the complainant

and Sandu Dhondiba Dube and all the concerned.

On 8.12.2010 application was filed by the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 21

Officers of the Corporation making complaint

to the Police Station. On the same date, the

applicant approached to the Collector

reiterating his grievance. On 10.12.2010, the

applicant approached to the Divisional

Commissioner as he being the highest officer

of the region and brought to his notice that

all illegalities are being committed by the

office of the Registrar and Collector and sale

deeds are being executed by Sandu Dube and the

complainant. On 13.12.2010, again applicant

approached to the Collector and also the

Registrar. It is argued further that the

Collector verified the fact from their record

and on 25.4.2010, directions are issued to

register crime against the complainant. It is

further argued that not only directions are

issued by the Collector to register offence

against the complainant but, directions were

issued to the Dy. Superintendent to look into

the matter in respect of map which was

prepared at the instance of the complainant.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 22

On 12.1.2011 the Superintendent of Land

Records cancelled earlier map dated 28th

April, 2010 and issued fresh map. Further

details are brought to my notice by the

learned Counsel for the applicant. He invited

my attention to the pleadings in the

application and submitted that when the

applicant ig has approached to several

authorities to take action against the

complainant and one Sandu Dhondiba Dube for

preparing forged N.A. order and for

encroaching and selling plots on the

Corporation land, which is in green belt, the

question of asking for ransom or alleged

extortion of money does not arise. According

to the learned Counsel for the applicant, the

applicant raised this issue in the Corporation

meeting and therefore, there is no any reason

why he will ask for any amount from the

complainant.

9. It is further submitted that the applicant

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 23

herein has been elected as Corporator of

Aurangabad Municipal Corporation for second

consecutive term, he is Vice President of

District Congress Committee since 12-13 years.

He is elected as opposition leader from

2006-07 and 2007-08. Applicant was elected as

Chairman of Standing Committee of Corporation

from 2008-09, 2009-10 and right now he is Gat

Neta in the Corporation as recognized by the

Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad and,

therefore, to malign his image, false

complaint is filed by the complainant. He is

not beneficiary nor has any interest in the

transaction of the complainant and section 420

of I.P.C., cannot be attracted. On the

contrary, it can be attracted against the

complainant. The CD prepared by the

complainant does not disclose that the

applicant demanded Rs.70 lakhs. It is further

submitted that though it is stated by the

complainant in the F.I.R. that he is owner of

purchasing the land from Sandu Dube, the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 24

record shows that he had purchased only 10

gunthas of land from Sandu Dube. It is

further submitted that the said land is in

green belt and also to the extent of 5 acres,

the Corporation is owner of the said land.

Though the applicant approached to various

authorities, no attention was given to his

complaint.

ig However, now offence is registered

against the complainant and Sandu Dhondiba

Dube recently for preparing forged N.A. order.

The learned Counsel further submitted that

extortion is contemplated u/s 384 of the

I.P.C., which can be made in secrecy.

However, the record shows that said provision

is not satisfied. The applicant attended the

police station every day between 9.00 a.m. to

2.00 p.m. from 31.12.2010 to 10.1.2011. In

case, bail is not granted to the applicant,

his prestige of the applicant will be lowered

down in the society and his political career

will be damaged. It is further submitted that

in fact, all the persons those who can be

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:54 ::: crapln190.11 25

witnesses against the complainant and illegal

activities of complainant and Sandu Dube, are

made accused with the help of police only with

a view that they should not open their mouth.

If the arrest of the applicant is caused, in

such circumstances the purpose of the

complainant will be satisfied. The Counsel

further

submitted that already offence is

registered against the complainant and Sandu

Dhondiba Dube u/s 420, 464, 467, 468, 471,

182(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. The learned Counsel

further invited my attention to the annexures

annexed to the application, pleadings therein

and the grounds taken in the application and

submitted that there is no question of any

demand from the complainant as alleged in the

complaint. It is further submitted that the

Fragmentation Act is applicable in the

Corporation Limit. He further submitted that

all the sale deeds are bogus and the same are

prepared on the basis of bogus N.A. order

which was prepared by the complainant and

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 26

Sandu Dube. It is further submitted that when

the applicant raised the issue in the meeting

of the Corporation on 6th December, 2010, he

did mention the name of Anwar Khan that he

might have been negotiating the matter with

the complainant. He further invited my

attention to the correspondence made to

various authorities and also all annexures and

submitted that the application of the

applicant deserves to be allowed.

10. Mr. Sapkal, learned Counsel for applicant

invited my attention to the judgment of the

Apex Court in the case of Siddharam

Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra

and ors., reported in 2010(12) SCALE 691 and

submitted that the scope of Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. has been explained in detail in the

said judgment. He relied on the following

observations and guidelines laid down by the

Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment:

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 27

"..... We are clearly of the view that no attempt should be made to provide rigid

and inflexible guidelines in this respect because all circumstances and situations of future cannot be clearly visualized for

the grant or refusal of anticipatory bail. In consonance with the legislative intention the grant or refusal of

anticipatory bail should necessarily

case.

depend on facts and circumstances of each As aptly observed in the

Constitution Bench decision in Sibbia's case (supra) that the High Court or the Court of Sessions to exercise their

jurisdiction under section 438 Cr.P.C. by a wise and careful use of their discretion

which by their long training and experience they are ideally suited to do. In any event, this is the legislative

mandate which we are bound to respect and honour.

11. Mr. Dixit, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the applicant Abdul Rauf Khan @

Khalil Khan s/o Mahemood Khan submitted that

the this applicant has been falsely involved

in the crime. There is no specific

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 28

allegations against the applicant. On the

contrary, the complainant himself alongwith

Sandu Dube, has been involved in the

preparation of forged N.A. order and in

selling illegally the land of Corporation.

When the N.A. order is part and parcel of the

sale deed, there is no question of inserting

the same later on. It is the complainant

who in collusion with others forged the N.A.

order and got the sale deed executed. The

allegations of the complainant about demanding

extortion of Rs.70/- lakhs is highly

improbable since the land in question was

purchased by the complainant for Rs.2,30,000/-

only. There is no evidence of involvement of

applicant in the crime and the complainant has

implicated the applicant falsely with the aid

of police. The learned Counsel for the

applicant, therefore, submitted that the

applicant deserves to be released on

anticipatory bail in the said crime.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 29

12. Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, learned Counsel

appearing for Applicant Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussein Patel has submitted that he is General

Power of Attorney holder of Sayyadbin Salem,

who sold 7 acres 7 gunthas land to Sandu

Dhondiba Dube and his brother Dhanaji.

According to him, 2 acres and 30 gunthas land

is still in possession of the legal heirs and

the present applicant tried to initiated his

work in respect of entering the names of the

legal heirs in the revenue record and,

therefore, he has been falsely involved in the

complaint. He further stated that no specific

allegations are levelled against him in the

F.I.R. It is submitted that when the

applicant got knowledge about the forged N.A.

order, the applicant has filed so many

complaints before various authorities

including Divisional Commissioner, Municipal

Commissioner and police, making grievance

about the forged documents prepared by the

complainant to grab the said land. The

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 30

learned Counsel submitted that the Sandu Dube

and his brother has already sold his entire

property.

13. The learned Counsel for the applicant

submitted that the applicant has no concern

with the alleged offence, he being G.P.A.

holder

of Sayeed Bin Salem Chous, he was

trying to protect the interest of the legal

heirs of Sayeed Bin Salem Chous. When he

noticed the forgery committed by the

complainant and others, he made complaints

against them. Therefore, he is falsely

involved in the crime. He submitted that the

real culprits are Sandu Dube and the

complainant, but yet, no action is taken

against them. He submitted that recently,

complaint regarding the misdeeds of the

complainant has been lodged by the concerned

authorities, who noticed that forged N.A.

order has been prepared by them. The learned

Counsel further submitted that the applicant

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 31

has been granted interim protection and the

applicant is a reputed person in society, he

is a law abiding citizen and will not flee

from justice if he is granted bail. The

Counsel submitted that in view of the peculiar

facts and circumstances involved in this

matter, the applicant deserves to be released

on

anticipatory bail by imposing certain

conditions, deemed fit.

14. The learned counsel Mr. Ladda appearing

for the complainant submitted that, there are

direct allegations against all the accused

persons. The contents of complaint

specifically speaks about the meeting of mind

and conspiracy committed by all the accused.

It is further submitted that, the N. A. orders

were inserted by accused Khalil Khan through

whom complainant got executed sale deeds and

who was aware about the documents and about

the transaction entered into by the

complainant with Sandu Dube. The said

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 32

document is inserted with the connivance of

accused Mr. Abdul Sajed. It is further

submitted that, it cannot be said that Khalil

Khan has no relation with the accused Abdul

Sajed. The learned counsel submitted that,

out of original survey No. 19 Sandu and his

brother have purchased 4 Acres 38 Guntha land

on 12.05.1966 by registered sale deed. The

original land bearing Sy. No. 19 was belonging

to one Mr. Sayyadbin Salem Chaus. On

12.05.1966 4 Acres 38 1/2 Guntha land was

purchased by Sandu and Dhanaji. The said

portion is on Eastern side. The second sale

deed was executed on 22.05.1970 in favour of

Sandu and Dhanaji. The said land was sold by

Sayyadbin Salem Chaus, the area of said land

was 02 Acre 08Guntha. Said portion was on

Western side. The total area which was sold

to Sandu and Dhanji was 07 Acres 06 1/2 Guntha

out of 09 Acre 37 Guntha. The 02 Acre 30 1/2

Guntha land remained with the original owner.

It is further submitted that, by mutation

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 33

entry No. 85 on 31.12.1970 the Sy. No. 19 was

divided into Sy. No. 19/1 and 19/2. The Sy.

No. 19/1 is to the extent of land 07 Acre 06

1/2 guntha purchased by Sandu and Dhanaji and

remaining land 02 Acres 30 1/2 G is given Sy.

No. 19/2 which remained with the original land

owner. The name of Sayyedbin Salem Chaus is

deleted vide mutation entry NO. 67 from Sy.

No. 19/1. It is further submitted that,

remaining land from Sy. No. 19/2 was sold by

Sayyedbin Salem Chaus on 25.02.1986 to the

extent of 41R in favour of one Mr. Habib

Ahemmad by sale deed day book No. 1152. By

another sale deed 41R land was sold to one Mr.

Habib Hasan by sale deed day book NO. 1790 on

25.07.1990. Remaining 28 1/2 guntha land was

sold by the original land owner on

10.06.1994 by sale deed Day Book No. 1529.

Therefore, the learned counsel for the

complainant would submit that, the entire land

was sold by the original land owner Sayyadbin

Salem Chaus under five sale deeds and last

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 34

transaction was on 10.06.1994. Therefore,

after 10th June, 1994, the original owner did

not possess any land. The counsel submitted

that, the Sy. No. 19/1 admeasuring 07 Acre 06

1/2 Guntha land belongs to Sandu and Dhanaji.

15. The learned counsel invited my attention

to page

38 of the compilation in Criminal

Application No. 208/2011 and submitted that,

alleged power of attorney given in favour of

one of the accused Shri Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussain Patel is on 09th December, 2010.

According to said Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussain Patel, the said power of attorney is

given by the legal representatives of

Sayyedbin Salem Chaus. The learned counsel

invited my attention to page 40 of the

compilation and submitted that, it is the case

of the legal representatives of Sayyedbin

Salem Chaus as reflected in their complaint

that, the revenue entries i. e. 7/12 extracts

are not in their name since they could not

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 35

take steps to enter the revenue entries,

because of illiteracy and week economical

position and, therefore, they are giving this

power of attorney in favour of Mr. Ajalkhan

and Gulamkhan and Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh

Hussain Patel. The counsel for the

complainant submitted that, the legal

representatives of Sayyedbin Salem Chaus

having no concern or any claim over the

property in Sy. No. 19/2 since entire property

was sold by the Sayyedbin Salem Chaus before

his death i. e. 10.06.1994. Learned counsel

submitted that, one of the accused Mr. Shaikh

Ibrahim Shaikh Hussain Patel has no concern

whatsoever with the land from Sy. No. 19/2.

Suddenly started addressing letters to the

authorities from the month of September, 2010.

According to the counsel for the complainant

when the power of attorney is given on 09th

December, 2010, there is no question of

addressing any letter by Shri Shaikh Ibrahim

Shaikh Hussain Patel from the month of

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 36

September, 2010 to the various authorities.

According to the counsel appearing for the

complainant, Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh Hussain

Patel got the interest created. The counsel

invited my attention to the page 38 of the

compilation i. e. first page of the power of

attorney document and submitted that, Shaikh

Ibrahim Shaikh Hussain Patel has purchased the

stamp of Rs. 2,05,500/- and created his

interest, though the entire land was sold by

deceased Sayyedbin Salem Chaus before June

1994. His legal representatives have no right

to give power of attorney to the Shaikh

Ibrahim Shaikh Hussain Patel, however, it is

collected to create such documents so as to

create interest in the said property. Learned

counsel submitted that, so far 07 Acres 06 1/2

Guntha land from Sy. No. 19/1 is concerned the

complainant entered into agreement to sell on

21st April, 2010 with Sandu Dhondu. It is

submitted that, after agreement to sell was

entered for the area of 05 Acres 10 Guntha

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 37

from Sy. No. 19/1, paper publication was given

on 20th May, 2010 in the news paper "Daily

Lokmat" stating there in that complainant has

entered into agreement to sell and if anybody

has objection about the said transaction, said

can be objected within one week from the date

of publication. It is further submitted that,

as nobody has objected for the said agreement

to sell or transaction including the

applicants herein. Therefore, from 11th June,

2010 to 20th August, 2010, the complainant

purchased 02 Acres 20 Guntha land through 20

sale deeds. It is the submission of the

learned counsel for the complainant that, as

per the availability of finance he has

purchased said land through 20 sale deeds.

Learned counsel submitted that, he has paid

around Rs. 1,34,50,000/- to Sandu towards

consideration. The learned counsel submitted

that in all the sale deeds, there is no

mention about N. A. There was no any reason

for the complainant to put bogus N. A. orders

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 38

in the sale deeds. No. N. A. order attached

to any of the sale deeds. The learned counsel

invited my attention to page 39 of the

compilation in Criminal Application No.

208/2001 to contend that no N. A. order was

attached to any of the sale deed. Learned

counsel further submitted that, the stamp

which was purchased and used for sale deed, on

top of said stamp paper it is written that

stamp is purchased from Abdul Samikhan. Said

Abdul Samikhan i. e. stamp vendor is real

brother of accused Kahlil Khan. Mr. Khalil

Khan accused is service provider and he uses

word "K.K." for identification. The learned

counsel submitted that, after registration of

sale deed in the Sub Registrars Office, one

copy of the original documents was returned to

the complainant and other copies were sent for

work of scanning. The work of scanning is

given on contract by the Government to Mr.

Khalil Khan i. e. one of the accused on

contract basis. It is the contention of the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 39

learned counsel for the complainant that, out

of remaining documents which were given by the

Sub Registrar Office to Khalil Khan, out of

two copies of 7/12 extract, one was removed by

said Khalil Khan and the another copy of

document i. e. identity proof was also removed

and the alleged document of N. A. is inserted

by said

Khalil Khan in the said portion.

According to the learned counsel for the

complainant, the word "Akar" refers to

agricultural land and said was written in said

documents and, therefore, there was no

question of inserting bogus N. A. orders by

the complainant in the documents of the sale

deed. These documents as stated herein before

are inserted by the said Khalil Khan by

removing one copy of 7/12 extract and the copy

of identity proof. Therefore, the counsel for

the complainant would submit that, the said

act of the Khalil Khan is with connivance

another accused Mr. Abdul Sajed. The learned

counsel further submitted that, when the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 40

complainant noticed that the bogus documents

of N. A. are inserted by the said Khalil Khan,

he lodged complaint with the Collector on

26.11.2010. The learned counsel invited my

attention to para 43 of the order of the

Sessions Court and submitted that, the

Sessions Court has taken a note of all the

sale deeds and on verification of sale deeds

found that no such N. A. order is there at all

and recorded that unless and until said bogus

N. A. was original sale deeds in the copies of

sale deed taken no found place. The learned

counsel further submitted that, there is no

record showing that land from Sy. No. 19/2

belongs to Corporation or State Government.

The learned counsel also submitted that, one

Mr. Zanjan employee of Corporation has stated

that, the said land does not belong to

Corporation. The learned counsel further

submitted that, taking into consideration

sale deeds and also transcription produced by

the complainant and other material brought on

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 41

record by the prosecution the Sessions Court

has cancelled the interim bail granted to the

three applicants/accused. The learned counsel

invited my attention to the judgment of this

Court in the case of Gabriel Joseph v. Feroz

Gulam Sarvar Khan and others, reported in 1992

Cri. L. J. 458 and more particularly para 4

and 8 of the said judgment. The counsel also

invited my attention to the reported judgment

of this Court in case of State of Maharashtra

Vs. Santosh Hraman Urankar & others reported

in 2005 (1) Bom. C. R. (Cri.) 513 and para 5

and 13 in particular. Learned counsel also

invited my attention to another judgment of

the Gujrat High Court in case of Jitendra

Narayanbhai Rajgor v. State of Gujrat reported

in 2005 Cri. L. J. 2371 and more particularly

para 35 of the said judgment. Learned counsel

further invited my attention to the reported

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case

of Naresh Kumar Yadav Vs. Ravindra Kumar and

others reported in 2008 All SCR 91 and

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 42

submitted that the power exercisable under S.

438 is some what extraordinary in character

and it is only in exceptional cases where it

appears that the person may be falsely

implicated or where there are reasonable

grounds for holding that a person accused of

an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse

his liberty, then power is to be exercised

under Sec. 438.

16. Therefore, the counsel for the complainant

submitted that, the Sessions Court has already

refused the anticipatory bail to the

applicants and, therefore, this Court may not

entertain the applications of the applicants

for the anticipatory bail.

17. The learned counsel Mr. Patani appearing

in one of the application for the complainant

submitted that, the conversation between the

complainant and accused persons from 1 and 1/2

month before lodging the complaint is recorded

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 43

by the complainant and said is handed over to

the concerned I. O. investigating into the

matter. The counsel submitted that, said

conversation between the complainant and

accused persons has not been denied by the

applicants/accused. They have also not denied

the telephonic recording of conversation

between the complainant and accused persons.

It is submitted that for identification of

voice custodial interrogation of the accused

applicant is necessary. The learned counsel

submitted that, the permission for N. A. was

sought by the complainant from the Collector

for 13445.11 square meters. However, the

applicants are misleading and trying to show

that the N. A. permission was sought for 4H

02R. The counsel also submitted that, there

is no substance in the contention of the

applicants that, the signatures of Mr. Dube

are forged. It is further submitted that, the

contention of the applicant is that by way of

Khasra Patrak, the Corporation is owner of the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 44

said land. However, in Khasra Patrak no name

of the Corporation or Government is shown.

The counsel invited my attention to the letter

written by Deputy Commissioner (CIDCO) to the

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation,

Aurangabad in which it is specifically stated

that, the Corporation is no way connected with

the land from Sy. No. 19/1 situated at Himayat

Nagar. The counsel further submitted that,

since the applicants are influential persons

and two of them are corporators , they have

influenced the authorities and they are

trying to influence the authorities and

creating record against the complainant. The

complainant is not any political personality.

The learned counsel invited my attention to

the reported judgment of this Court in case of

Rajesh Kumar Vs. State of Maharashtra reported

in 200 All MR (Cri) 1739 and more particularly

para 3 of the said judgment and submitted

that, the anticipatory bail should be granted

only in appropriate cases and same should not

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 45

be granted in the cases like one in hand. The

counsel further submitted that, the details

about the phone calls is called by the

concerned I. O. who is investigating into the

matter. The counsel therefore, submitted

that, the applicant/accused does not deserve

to be released on anticipatory bail. The

Sessions ig Court taking into consideration

entire material brought on record has rejected

the application for anticipatory bail filed by

the accused. Therefore, this Court may reject

the application for anticipatory bail.

18. The learned A.P.P. Mr. Nandedkar appearing

for the State invited my attention to the

contents of the complaint and submitted that

serious allegations are made in the complaint,

which need to be investigated thoroughly and

for further investigation, custodial

interrogation of the applicants / accused is

necessary. It is further submitted that when

interim protection was granted to the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 46

applicants, though they attended the police

station, they did not cooperate with the

investigating machinery. The learned A.P.P.

further submitted that the applicant / accused

Abdul Sajed has taken an amount of Rs.10 lakhs

from the complainant as alleged in the

complaint and he has accepted the said amount

for himself as well as on behalf of other co-

accused and also demanded further amount of

Rs.70 lakhs.

19. The A.P.P. submitted that the offences

alleged against the applicants are serious in

nature, since huge amount was demanded as

extortion. He submitted further that the land

in dispute does not belong to Government or

Corporation as the same fact is stated by Mr.

Shivaji Zanzan, Administrative Officer of the

Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad.

He invited my attention to the statement of

Mr. Zanzan and submitted that Mr. Zanzan has

stated that the land is agricultural land and

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 47

it cannot be used for plotting as stated by

the Planning Department of the Corporation.

The learned A.P.P. submitted that the

applicant Shaikh Ibrahim became G.P.A. holder

of heirs of Sayeedbin Salem Chaus only on 9th

December, 2010. Therefore, there was no

question of having his any interest in the

said land prior to that date. He further

submitted that the statements of Talathi and

Tahsildar are recorded and in their

statements, they have stated that Sayeedbin

Salem Chaus and his legal heirs have no

concern with the said land since the same has

been sold long back and there is no any

revenue record showing their name and,

therefore, their G.P.A. given to Shaikh

Ibrahim is of no consequence. The learned

A.P.P. submitted that as many as seven

offences are registered against the applicant

Abdul Sajed and three of them are of similar

nature as that of the offence alleged in the

present complaint. The A.P.P. further

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 48

submitted that the applicants herein are

influential persons and if they are released

on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution

evidence and threaten the prosecution

witnesses. He invited my attention to the

arguments advanced before the Sessions Court

and submitted that the Sessions Court, after

appreciation of the material brought on

record, has recorded correct findings and

rejected the applications for anticipatory

bail. Therefore, he prayed that, applications

may be rejected.

20. The learned Counsel Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh,

for the applicant in Criminal Application No.

208 of 2011 further invited my attention to

the ground Nos.VII and XI in the application

and submitted that possibility of tampering so

called conversation cannot be ruled out. He

further submitted that Regular Appeal No.76 of

1996 has been decided by the Additional

District Judge, Aurangabad in respect of the

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 49

said land.

21. Mr. Sapkal, learned Counsel for the

applicant in Criminal Application No.190 of

2011 invited my attention to the paragraph 42

of the compilation and submitted that on 12th

January, 2011, the Superintendent of Land

Records cancelled the earlier map dated 28th

April, 2010 and issued fresh map. In this

map, it is clearly mentioned that the land

which was shown to the extent of 2 Hector and

24 Aar (5 acres and 14 Gunthas) is cancelled.

This clearly shows that this was alluvial

land.

22. Mr. Dixit, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the applicant in Criminal

Application No.194 of 2011 invited my

attention to para 23 of the application and

submitted that though the complainant

purchased 10 Gunthas of land, documents show

that the complainant wanted N.A. of the entire

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 50

land, though he had no concern with the same.

23. I have given due consideration to the

rival submissions of the parties. I have also

perused the applications, annexures thereto,

the order passed by the Sessions Court and

also the investigation papers as were made

available for perusal.

24. It appears that initially, interim

protection was given to the applicants. The

Sessions Court heard the applications for

anticipatory bail finally and on appreciating

new material produced on record by the

parties, rejected the applications. It further

appears that the Sessions Court had seen

original sale deeds and also transcript which

was produced before it also the investigation

papers and refused to grant bail to the

applicants.

25. At this juncture, it would be appropriate

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 51

to refer to the judgment of the Constitution

Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of

Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others vs.

State of Punjab, reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565,

wherein the Apex Court has laid down some

guiding principles / factors to be taken into

consideration while entertaining application

u/s 438

of Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail,

which are as follows:

"31. In regard to anticipatory bail, if

the proposed accusation appears to stem

not from motives of furthering the ends of justice but from some ulterior motive, the object being to injure and

humiliate the applicant by having him arrested a direction for the release of the applicant on bail in the event of his arrest would generally, be made. On the

other hand, if it appears likely considering the antecedents of the applicant, that taking advantage of the order of anticipatory bail he will flee from justice, such an order would not be made. But the converse of these

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 52

propositions is not necessarily true. That is to say it cannot be laid down

as an inexorable rule that anticipatory bail cannot be granted unless the proposed accusation appears to be

actuated by mala fides; and, equally, that anticipatory bail must be granted if there is no fear that the applicant

will abscond. There are several other

considerations, too numerous to enumerate the combined effect of which must

weigh with the court while granting or rejecting anticipatory bail. The nature and seriousness of the proposed charges,

the context of the events likely to lead to the making of the charges,

a reasonable possibility of the applicant's presence not being secured at the trial, a reasonable apprehension

that witnesses will be tampered with and "the larger interests of the public or the state" are some of the

considerations which the court has to keep in mind while deciding an application for anticipatory bail."

26. It is further held by the Apex Court, thus:

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 53

"35. Section 438(1) of the Code lays down a condition which has to be satisfied

before anticipatory bail can be granted.

The applicant must show that he has "reason to believe" that he may be

arrested for a non-bailable offence. The use of the expression "reason to believe"

shows that the belief that the

applicant may be so arrested must be founded 'fear' ig on reasonable grounds.

is not 'belief', for which reason Mere

it is not enough for the applicant to show that he has some sort of a vague apprehension that some one is going to

make an accusation against him, in pursuance of which he may be arrested.

The grounds on which the belief of the applicant is based that he may be arrested for a non-bailable offence,

must be capable of being examined by the court objectively, because it is then alone that the court can determine

whether the applicant has reason to believe that he may be so arrested. Section 438(1), therefore, cannot be invoked on the basis of vague and general allegations, as if to arm oneself in perpetuity against a possible arrest. Otherwise, the number of applications for

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 54

anticipatory bail will be as large as, at any rate, the adult populace.

Anticipatory bail is a device to secure the individual's liberty; it is neither a passport to the commission of crimes nor

a shield against any and all kinds of accusations, likely or unlikely."

27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Siddharam

Satlingappa ig Mhetre's case (supra, observed

that following factors are required to be

taken into consideration while dealing with

anticipatory bail:

"122. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail:

i. The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the

accused must be properly

comprehended before arrest is made;

ii. The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 55

in respect of any cognizable offence;

iii. The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;

iv. The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences.

v. Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or

humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her.

vi. Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large

magnitude affecting a very large number of people.

vii. The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must

also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which accused is implicated with the help of sections 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 56

common knowledge and concern;

viii. While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors namely,

no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment,

humiliation and unjustified detention of

the accused;

ix. The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the

complainant;

x. Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to

be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the

prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail.

123. The arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to those

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 57

exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative in the facts and

circumstances of that case.

124. The court must carefully examine the entire available record and particularly the allegations which have been directly

attributed to the accused and these

allegations are corroborated material and circumstances on record.

by other

125. These are some of the factors which should be taken into consideration while

deciding the anticipatory bail applications."

28. The Sessions Court has elaborately

considered the arguments of the Counsel

appearing for the respective parties in three

bail petitions. It further appears on perusal

of the judgment and order of the Sessions

Court that the Court has gone through

voluminous documents in the compilation filed

by the applicant Abdul Sajed and others and

also the investigation papers, the documents

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 58

produced by the complainant as well as

original sale deeds and also the transcripts.

In paragraph 25 to 27 of the judgment, the

Sessions Court has referred the judgments of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this

Court. In para 30, the Court has noted that

the accused Abdul Sajed and Khalil khan are

corporators of Municipal Corporation,

Aurangabad. Besides the same, it seems that

Abdul Sajed is a builder by profession and

Khalil Khan is running a business i.e. agency

to execute sale deeds. The trial Court has

perused the original sale deeds and found that

in those original sale deeds, the said bogus

N.A. Order is not there, which has been placed

in the copies of the sale deeds. The Court

has considered the arguments of the parties

about the preparation of forged N.A. order and

insertion of the same in the copies of the

sale deeds in paragraph 31 and 32. In para

35, the Court has recorded that the N.A. order

of the disputed property, which finds place in

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 59

the copies of the sale deeds produced in the

compilation, is apparently forged and bogus

document. Because, original N.A. order is in

the name of Abdul Gani, which bears the

signature of the Collector, while bogus N.A.

order does not bear signature of Collector and

it only speaks that as per the order of

Collector, it was issued. In para 36, the

Court observed, thus:

"But in this regard the original sale

deeds produced by the complainant for

verification of this Court, show that, in those sale deeds no such N.A. order is there at all. Unless and until said bogus

N.A. order was in original sale deed, in the copies of sale deed, it could not have found place. But it is there in the copies of sale deeds obtained by Abdul

Sajed and it is specific allegation of complainant that, accused Abdul Sajed got it prepared from Sk. Ibrahim and inserted it in the copies of sale deed through accused Khalil Khan through whom complainant got those sale deeds

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 60

registered. The original sale deeds produced by the complainant show that,

complainant got those sale deeds registered through the agency of accused Khalil Khan. Therefore, looking to these

facts, there is every possibility that, Khalil Khan was having knowledge about said transaction of complainant and his

brother with Sandu Dupe and in order to extract ig money from complainant, facie the possibility cannot be ruled out prima

that, Khalil Khan with the help of some employees of Sub Registrar's office, might have got inserted said bogus N.A. order in

the copies of sale deeds in favour of complainant and his brother. It appears

that when complainant noticed this fact from accused Abdul Sajed who had called the complainant at his house to demand

ransom, complainant had immediately filed complaint about the filing of bogus N.A. order in the copies of sale deeds to

Collector on 26.11.2010."

29. Therefore, in para 37 the Court has

reached to the conclusion that in the copies

of sale deeds, N.A. order was inserted by

somebody and needle of suspicion points

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 61

towards accused Abdul Sajed, Khalil Khan and

Sk. Ibrahim. The trial Court, in paragraph

38, has considered the demand of Rs.10 lakhs

by Abdul Sajed and version of the complainant

about what transpired between Abdul Sajed and

himself. In para 39, the Court has reached to

the conclusion that possibility of attaching

bogus N.A. order in the copies of sale deeds

in favour of the complainant and his brother

by Khalil Khan, on the say of Abdul Sajed

cannot be ruled out. In para 40, the Court

has recorded, thus:

"40. Therefore, if the said contents of

complaint are considered with the above

facts, then certainly, prima facie it can

be concluded that, in order to extract

money from complainant, said bogus N.A.

order might have been inserted in the

copies of sale deeds by accused Abdul

Sajed through Khalil Khan. That is why

said bogus N.A. order nowhere finds place

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 62

in original sale deeds."

30. In paragraphs 41 to 44, there is

discussion about the contents of the complaint

filed by the complainant. In para 45, the

trial Court, on the basis of the contents of

the complaint, has referred to the

conversation between the complainant and co-

accused and recorded conclusion that in the

light of said contents of complaint and

recording of conversation by the complainant,

the transcription of conversation prepared by

the police under panchanama needs to be

considered. In para 46, the Court has referred

to the panchanama of conversation prepared by

police after running the C.D., which shows

prima facie that, it is the conversation of

the meetings with Anwar Khan dated 9.12.2010,

meeting dated 10.12.2010, 11.12.2010,

13.12.2010 and 14.12.2010. Similarly, it also

speaks about recording of 29 telephonic calls

between complainant and Anwarkhan on 9.12.2010

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 63

to 14.12.2010. It also speaks about the

conversation of the meeting dated 12.12.2010

between complainant, Abdul Sajed, Ibrahim

Patel, Khalil Khan, Anwar Khan and Sk. Rais.

Said conversation was for near about two hours

thirty eight minutes and thirty five seconds.

It further appears that the trial Court has

perused the said transcription of conversation

between complainant and Abdul Sajed minutely

and in para 47, the Court has reached to the

conclusion that prima facie it can be

concluded that there was meeting between Abdul

Sajed and the complainant and it was in

respect of land purchased by the complainant

and his brother. The Court has recorded that

it appears from the transcription that the

complainant told accused Abdul Sajed that, the

amount is very huge and he requested Abdul

Sajed to minimize that amount. It further

shows that Abdul Sajed told the complainant

that earlier, when complainant left his house,

Sk. Ibrahim and accused Khalil Khan had come

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:55 ::: crapln190.11 64

to him and Khalilkhan told that he wants to

purchase 2 Acre 30 Guntha land. It further

speaks that 2 Acre 30 Guntha land is not owned

by Sandu Dhondiba and it further speaks that,

how Sandu Dhondiba sold the land without its

title. It also speaks about meeting of Abdul

Sajed with Balaji Kshirsagar about said 2 Acre

30 Guntha land. It also speaks that, police

informed him about the ransom demanded by him

and on that, he told police to register crime

against him and further told that, within

two/three days he will be released on bail.

31. In para 38, the Court has recorded that

the said transcription of conversation and

recorded that the said transcription speaks

further that accused Sajed asked the

complainant to settle the issue immediately

since he is also a Muslim person. On that,

complainant told that, it would not be better

to fight with each other and the amount

demanded by the accused is big amount.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 65

32. In para 50 of the judgment, the Court

observed, thus:

"50. .... Therefore, if said transcription is considered, then

certainly, prima facie it can be concluded that, the stand taken by Abdul Sajed that,

in order to protect and safeguard the property of Municipal Corporation, he

filed those complaints and raised the issue in Standing Committee meeting, cannot be said to be bonafide. But, on

the contrary, prima facie from

transcription of conversation it can be concluded that, filing of complaints to various Government Authorities, was well

planned action taken by Abdul Sajed to extract money from complainant. It also appears prima facie that, in the sale deeds in favour of complainant and his

brother, it has been clearly mentioned that, the land purchased by them is in green belt. Therefore, in the original sale deeds, no question arose at all to attach the N.A. order and hence, that bogus N.A. order nowhere finds place in

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 66

the original sale deeds. It apparently finds place in the copies of sale deeds

and as per the transcription of conversation, it appears that, it was inserted by accused Khalil Khan in those

copies and it was done so as to extract money from complainant by threatening him that Police will take action against him

if complaint is filed at Police Station.

It cannot be ignored that, purchase of land in green belt is not an offence and

only its use for N.A. without order of Collector is an offence. It prima facie appears from the documents on record as

well as said transcription of conversation that, exactly accused Abdul Sajed and

others tried to take benefit of this fact by inserting bogus N.A. order in the copies of sale deeds."

33. The Court has also considered the

statement of accused Anwarkhan, who was

arrested in connection of this crime and

observed in para 51 that his statement also

categorically shows the involvement of the

present three accused persons in the alleged

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 67

crime and therefore, in para 54 the Court has

opined that, prima facie, there appears to be

involvement of all the three accused in the

crime and they are involved in serious offence

of demanding ransom, which is serious in

nature and ultimately, rejected the bail

applications.

34. It appears that initially interim bail was

granted to the applicants / accused. However,

on finding subsequently sufficient material

brought on record by the prosecution, prima

facie, indicating involvement of the

applicants, the trial Court observed that

offences alleged against the applicants -

accused are serious in nature and right of

investigation should be properly allowed to be

exercised by the police and in the facts and

circumstances of the case, custodial

interrogation is necessary.

35. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 68

(supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held,

"Superior courts will, undoubtedly, exercise

their discretion properly, and not make any

observations in the order granting

anticipatory bail which will have a tendency

to prejudice the fair trial of the

accused." (Emphasis supplied).

36. Therefore, keeping in mind the

observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I

think it appropriate not to comment upon the

minute details of the evidence / material

collected by the prosecution agency. The trial

Court has elaborately dealt with the documents

brought on record and also other material by

the parties and has recorded elaborate

findings and conclusions.

37. I have independently scrutinized / scanned

the material brought on record by the

applicants, complainant and the investigation

papers made available to me by the prosecution

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 69

agency. On careful perusal of the entire

material, I am of the opinion that the

conclusions reached at by the trial Court are

in consonance with the material brought on

record. I do not think that the observations

of the Sessions Court are contrary to the

material brought on record. Since any further

observations on the said documents or material

brought on record may prejudice the case /

trial of the accused, I refrain to comment

upon the same.

38. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia

(supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court considered

the necessity for granting anticipatory bail

mainly because some times, influential persons

try to implicate their rivals in getting them

detained in jail for some days. In recent

times, with the accentuation of political

rivalry, this tendency is showing signs of

steady increase.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 70

39. In the instant case, out of three

applicants, the applicants namely Abdul Sajed

and Khalil Khan are corporators. They have

stated in their application about their

political status. From perusal of the

available record, it does not appear that the

complainant is occupying any political post or

he is

actively involved in politics. It

appears that he is involved in construction

business. As stated earlier, the trial Court

has observed that though Abdul Sajed and

Khalil Khan are corporators, besides the same,

Abdul Sajed is a builder by profession and

Khalil Khan is running business i.e. agency to

execute sale deeds. Therefore, it prima facie

appears that registration of complaint is not

out of any political rivalry or to malign

image of the applicants. In the

aforementioned judgments, the Apex Court has

given some guiding principles / factors to be

considered while entertaining the application

for anticipatory bail. One of the factors

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 71

required to be considered is interest of the

society or public interest. In the present

case, the offences alleged against the

applicants are serious in nature, in the sense

that there is allegation of extortion and

actual payment of Rs.10 lakhs to Abdul Sajed.

The public at large is bound to have interest

in such matters to see that the investigation

is properly carried out and conducted by the

concerned Investigating Officer and for that,

the concerned Police Officer should be given

full right of investigation. The cases of

extortion, ransom, theft, robbery etc. create

panic in the society. Society has interest

and further stakes to see that such offences

are seriously investigated, the offenders are

properly booked and appropriate action should

be taken against them as permissible in law,

to avoid such commission of offences in

future. One of the factors which is required

to be considered as per the judgment of the

Apex Court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 72 Mhetre (supra) is whether the accused will

again indulge in such offence in future. It

has been argued by the Public Prosecutor

before this Court that there are seven

offences registered against Abdul Sajed and

three out of them are registered under

Sections 420, 468, 471 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. and

one crime is registered under the Prevention

of Corruption Act under Section 13(1)(5) r/w

13(2) of the said Act and u/s 109 of I.P.C.

(Emphasis supplied). Therefore, this important

argument cannot be brushed aside and

antecedent of applicants / accused needs to be

taken into consideration as per judgment of

the Constitution Bench in Gurbaksh Singh

Sibbia (supra).

40. The another factor required to be

considered is whether the accused will

influence the prosecution witnesses, if bail

is granted. In the instant case, as stated

earlier, certainly out of three accused

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 73

persons two are corporators and their release

would certainly have effect of tampering with

prosecution evidence / witnesses.

41. Therefore, in the present case, the public

at large would like to see that investigation

is properly carried out, if necessary by

custodial ig interrogation, as permissible in

law. Undoubtedly, the offences are serious in

nature and the society has stake and interest

to see that the accused are properly dealt

with, in accordance with law.

42. It has come on record that Shaikh Ibrahim

has become G.P.A. holder on 9th December, 2010

and prima facie, it appears that he cannot

have any interest earlier to that in the

subject property. However, Abdul Sajed in his

application has stated that one G.P.A. holder

of Sayyadbin Salem has filed complaint on 30th

September, 2010 to the Commissioner of

Municipal Corporation and it was mentioned in

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 74

the complaint that by using forged N.A. order,

property in green belt possessed by Sayyadbin

Salem is sold. Copy of the said communication

was marked to the present applicant for

raising point in corporation. Therefore, he

stepped in, is not the correct position. In

fact, G.P.A. is given in favour of the

applicant Shaikh Ibrahim by the legal heirs of

Sayyadbin Salem Chaus on 9.12.2010, who was

original owner of the property. Prior to that,

Shaikh Ibrahim had no concern with the said

property. It is also argued by the Counsel

for the complainant that the said Sayyadbin

Salem Chaus had sold his entire property in

1994 itself and from 1994 till the G.P.A. is

given, there are no revenue entries in the

name of legal heirs of said Sayyadbin Salem

Chaus. It has been stated by the legal heirs

in the document of G.P.A. given in favour of

Shaikh Ibrahim in para no.2, that there is no

entry in their name in revenue record.

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 75

43. It has come on record that the police have

investigated into the matter, one of the co-

accused Mr. Anwar Khan was arrested and he has

also stated about the involvement of the

present applicants in the alleged crime.

Therefore, the concerned Investigating Officer

will have to investigate the matter further

and find out definite role played by each of

the accused. There are five accused persons.

However, one of them is absconding and is not

available for investigation. Therefore, it is

also matter of concern and it may happen in

case of other co-accused also. As already

stated, from the view point of society and

public at large, the offences alleged in the

complaint are serious in nature and the

concerned Investigating Officer is required to

be given right to thoroughly investigate in

the matter. At the cost of repetition, it has

to be stated that the trial Court has

cancelled the interim bail only after careful

scrutiny of the material brought on record

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 76

including the original sale deeds, transcript

and also the statement of Anwar Khan. The

said course is permissible as per the judgment

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of

Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre (supra). The

Supreme Court observed, thus:

"117.

ig The view expressed by this Court in all the above referred judgments have

to be reviewed and once the anticipatory bail is granted then the protection should ordinarily be available till the end of

the trial unless the interim protection by

way of the grant of anticipatory bail is curtailed when the anticipatory bail granted by the court is cancelled by the

court on finding fresh material or circumstances or on the ground of abuse of the indulgence by the accused. "

44. Therefore, in the light of above

observations, and in view of the fact that

the prosecution and the complainant have

brought on record sufficient fresh material in

the nature of original sale deeds,

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 77

transcription of conversation, statement of

co-accused Anwar Khan and other material and,

therefore, the trial Court, after examining

the said material meticulously, cancelled the

interim bail.

45. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia

(supra), the Supreme Court has observed that

while considering the application for

anticipatory bail, individual right and right

of police to investigate into the matter is

required to be balanced. Therefore, in the

present case, it is necessary to see that the

police also gets right to investigate the

matter and it has to be balanced with the

individual right. It has also been argued by

the Counsel for the complainant that for the

purpose of execution of the sale deed, the

stamp which was purchased finds the name of

brother of Khalil Khan on front page as stamp

vendor. This fact is not denied by Khalil

Khan. It has also been argued that said

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 78

Khalil Khan is involved in the process of

execution of sale deeds and further for

scanning documents as he is given the work by

the Government on contract.

46. The applicant Abdul Sajed has admitted

that the complainant did come to his house.

In para 45 of his application, it is stated

that the complainant personally contacted him

and he came to his house only with a view to

cheat the applicant. Therefore, the fact that

complainant came to the house of the applicant

Abdul Sajed has been admitted by him. It is

also relevant to note that the application for

anticipatory bail has been filed on 14th

January, 2011. However, Ground No.XVI is

taken in the said application stating therein

that the accused Ibrahim Patel filed complaint

u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. before the J.M.F.C.

seeking directions against the Police Station

to register crime against the complainant for

not only preparing bogus N.A. order but using

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 79

it and giving false information to the police

station on which F.I.R. is registered against

the applicant. In fact, the said offence is

registered on January 24, 2011 as orally

stated by the Counsel appearing for the

parties. As stated earlier, the application

for anticipatory bail has been filed on 14th

January, ig2011 and the aforesaid ground has

been taken in the said application in respect

of offence which is registered after filing

the application on 24.1.2011. Reasonable

inference can be drawn about the influence of

the applicant Abdul Sajed.

47. It has come on record in the application

of Abdul Sajed that he has no concern with the

said land. Though the Counsel appearing for

the applicant Abdul Sajed vehemently argued

that the applicant was consistently pursuing

the Government authorities to protect the

government land, at this juncture, it is

necessary to mention that there are number of

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 80

government / corporation lands which are under

encroachment and there is able and efficient

government / corporation machinery provided

under the relevant law / Rules to remove such

encroachments, in accordance with law. The

interest of the applicant Abdul Sajed in this

particular land does not seem to be bonafide

as observed by the Sessions Court. Though,

the Counsel for the applicant Abdul Sajed has

argued that the said applicant has raised

voice about the corruption of Anwar Khan

during discussion about the said land in the

Standing Committee meeting, upon perusal of

the said discussion, it appears that the word

used by Abdul Sajed was "Khan" and not

"Anwarkhan". Therefore, merely because he has

stated something during the discussion before

the Sabhapati in the said meeting that would

not lead to the conclusion that he has no

relation with the co-accused Anwar Khan. In

fact, Anwar Khan is working as an employee of

the Corporation and in his statement, he has

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 81

specifically named all the three applicants

and also their overtacts. Therefore, there is

statement of Anwar Khan implicating these

accused in the alleged crime. It has come on

record that Abdul Sajed has started raising

voice only from the month of September, 2010

when the another applicant Shaikh Ibrahim had

given him copy of the letter, which he had

addressed to the Commissioner, Municipal

Corporation, Aurangabad raising objection

stating therein that Survey No.19/1 situated

at Himayatnagar (Himayat Bag) is owned by them

and Sandu Dhondiba Dube and others are

unauthorizedly selling said plots and,

therefore, immediate action may be taken

against them. Said land belongs to

Corporation and Kham river is flowing through

the said land and their land is in green belt,

which cannot be developed. This admission of

Abdul Sajed, prima facie, strengthens the case

of the prosecution that Abdul Sajed and other

co-accused namely Shaikh Ibrahim and Khalil

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 82

Khan have systematically planned the things in

order to extract money from the complainant.

48. The learned Counsel for the applicants

have argued that even offence has been

registered against the complainant for

creating forged N.A. order in respect of said

property on 24th January, 2011 and, therefore,

now it is clear that the complainant was

instrumental in preparing bogus N.A. order.

In this regard, law will take its own course

and this Court need not go into that aspect

since those are the events subsequent to

filing of bail applications. If the

complainant or any other person is responsible

for any offence, the prosecution machinery

will deal with it as per law. Whether the

said land belongs to Government or private

person is different matter and if somebody has

encroached the said land, the Government

machinery will take care of it. This court has

not expressing any opinion about the ownership

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 83

of the said land.

49. In the present case, on assessing the

entire material on record, prima facie, it

does appear that the applicants have taken

keen interest and systematically planned the

events so as to reach their goal.

In case of State Rep. by the C.B.I. vs.

Anil Sharma, reported in (1997) 7 SCC 187, the

Apex Court held, thus:

"6. ..... Custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well

ensconced with a favorable order under Section 438 if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected

person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Succession such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulted by a pre-arrest bail

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 84

during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition

would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person

being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in

all criminal cases. The court has to

would

presume that responsible Police Officers conduct themselves in task of

disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders."

50. Therefore, in the light of above, in my

opinion, the applicants do not deserve to be

released on anticipatory bail. Hence, all the

three applications seeking anticipatory bail

are rejected.

At this stage the learned Counsel for the

applicants prayed for extension of interim

protection by further three weeks. However,

interim protection is extended till 8th

February, 2011. It is made clear that no

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 ::: crapln190.11 85

further extension will be granted.

Needless to mention that, the observations

made herein before, are only for the purpose

of deciding the present applications seeking

anticipatory bail.

ig [ S.S. SHINDE ] JUDGE. ...

kadam/*

::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:48:56 :::