Advocates:
['SAPKAL V D', 'COPY SERVED ON PP', '', 'VIJAY SHARMA']

Cri. Appln. No. 5659/13

1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5659 OF 2013

Saniya Sayyed Quadri

....Applicant.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

....Respondents.

Mr. V.D. Sapkal, Advocate for applicant.

Mrs. S.G. Chincholkar, APP for State.

Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate, assist to APP.

CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED : 11th December, 2013.

ORDER :

1.

The application is filed for relief of anticipatory bail.

Both the sides are heard. Learned counsel Shri. Vijay Sharma was

allowed to assist the learned APP. This Court has perused the

papers of investigation.

2.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by

one Santosh Choudhary. In the report dated 8.3.2011 he has

made allegations that false record is created by the present

Cri. Appln. No. 5659/13

2

applicant to show that she has paid the amount of Rs. 21 lakh to

the complainant on 7.12.2010. There was a transaction of sale of

immovable property between the complainant and the applicant

and the document was executed on 12.4.2010. On that day, part

of consideration was paid in cash and for payment of remaining

consideration, one cheque dated 1.6.2010 was given by the

present applicant. It is the case of complainant that the cheque

was not to be presented immediately as the applicant had

requested him to do so and she wanted to collect money from the

proposed purchasers of the plots. The property which was

purchased by her under document was to be developed by her.

Complainant has contended that he did not deposit the cheque

for encashment within the prescribed period due to the promise

given by the applicant to see that payment is made.

3.

The dispute started between the parties probably

from December 2010 or January 2011. In January 2011, the

present applicant gave report against the complainant that he

was demanding the amount of Rs. 60 lakh as extortion money. In

view of this circumstance, according to the complainant, he

decided to approach the Civil Court. According to him, he filed

Special Civil Suit No. 25/2011 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior

Division, Jalgaon for cancellation of aforesaid sale deed. The suit

Cri. Appln. No. 5659/13

3

was filed on 1.2.2011 and the written statement came to be filed

on 14.2.2011. It is the case of the complainant that when he saw

written statement dated 14.2.2011 and the zerox copy of

document shown to be executed on stamp of Rs.100/-

denomination, he realized that some false document is created by

the present applicant to show that the consideration amount was

already paid on 7.12.2010. It is his case that he then made inquiry

with the Notary Public Advocate Shri. Choudhary as the document

was shown to be notarized before him. It is his case that the

Notary Public admitted that only the applicant had come to him to

get the document notarized and he trusted her and so, he

notarized the document. It is the case of the complainant that

there was some over writing and use of whitener on the entry

made in the register by the Notary. It is his case that he sent hand

writing appearing on the so called document of acknowledge and

his admitted hand writing to hand writing expert and the expert

from Nagpur gave opinion that the hand writing appearing on the

document which the applicant is using in the Court is different and

that is not of the complainant. He then gave report against the

applicant. The crime is registered against the applicant for

offences punishable under sections 420, 468, 471 etc. of Indian

Penal Code.

Cri. Appln. No. 5659/13

4

4.

This Court has perused the record. The record

includes statement of Notary Public and copy of the entry made in

his register which is at Sr. No. 3653 dated 7.12.2010. The entry

shows that it was singed only by the applicant and not by the

complainant. In