1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and is heard by consent.

2. This is an application for regular bail.

3. Applicant is named as accused in Crime No. 224 of 2011, Zilla Peth Police Station, District Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. One Chandrashekhar s/o Prakash Attarde, Builder and Developer, is the informant.

5. Gist of the complaint lodged by Chandrashekhar Attarde and the background is as follows :The complaint is filed by one Mr. Chandrashekhar Attarde on 29th July, 2011. According to the complainant, he and his brother-in-law Mr. Ulhas Patil had purchased a plot of land for a sum of Rs. 2,10,00,000/- and wanted to develop the same. The complainant had submitted papers to the officer of Bhusaval Municipal Council for sanction of layout on 16th April, 2011. Mr. Jakir Shaikh, officer of the Bhusaval Municipal Council informed him that the file concerning the complainant is lying at the bunglow of the present applicant and that the complainant should see the present applicant. He was also informed that unless the present applicant grants the permission, the file would not move for sanction and layout cannot be sanctioned. Thereafter, the complainant is alleged to have visited the present applicant at Ajintha Rest House where the present applicant is said to have put terms to the complainant, viz; to pay a sum of Rs. 1 Crore or offer 25% of the land to the present applicant. Thereafter, the First Information Report came to be registered and accordingly trap was arranged. The pre-trap panchnama was conducted on 29th July, 2011 and the amount was agreed to be paid to one Mr. Bablu @ Balkirishna. According to the complainant, one installment of Rs.10 Lacs was paid prior to laying down the trap. In the second installment, an amount of Rs.15 Lacs was to be paid. The trap was successfully laid and said Bablu @ Balkrishna was found in possession of cash of Rs.15,00,000/- and odd, being the second installment.

6. Applicant was arrested on 29th July, 2011. Various accused were arrested on different dates. They were initially kept in police custody, and ultimately, remanded to magisterial custody.

7. The prayer for bail was rejected by the Judicial Magistrate, then by Sessions Court, and in Criminal Application No. 4773 of 2011 by this Court (Coram : R.Y. Ganoo, J.) by order dated 15th November, 2011.

8. Applicant’s Petition for Special Leave to Appeal being No. 908 of 2011, filed in Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed on 16th December, 2011, with order as follows :

“ORDER

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

However, we make it clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the High Court in the month of February, 2012 and the same may be considered on its own merits.”

9. Present application has been filed pursuant to the liberty, as was noted in the order quoted in foregoing paragraph.

10. Heard Shri A.P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate for the applicant, Shri S.G. Nandedkar, APP for the respondent / State and Shri P.P. Chavan, Advocate, for the informant who had applied for leave to assist the prosecution.

11. Learned Senior Advocate Shri A.P. Mundargi narrowed down the compass of his submissions to the points as below :-

(i) The applicant is in custody for more than six months since arrest in July, 2011.

(ii) Investigation is already completed and charge-sheet has been filed.

(iii) During the trial, recording of voices, for reference for opinion of Forensic Laboratory, has been recently done.

(iv) The completion of trial cannot be easily foreseen within any estimated duration.

(v) Offences under Sections 384 and 385 I.P.C. are punishable with three years and two years of imprisonment, respectively