LAXMAN RAMCHANDRA SATHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.148 of 2018 registered with Mankhurd Police Station, under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

(2.) The FIR is lodged on 09/06/2018 by one Vinayak Shinde. He has stated in his FIR that, MHADA had given possession of 77 rooms to M/s. Trimurti Enterprises vide letter dated 03/09/2004. The rooms were situated in building Nos.28, 29, 31 and 33 in P.M.G.P. colony at Mankhurd. The applicant No.2 Akkatai and her son Sachin were the partners of M/s. Trimurti Enterprises. The applicant No.1 is husband of applicant No.2 and applicant No.3 is wife of Sachin. There are allegations in the FIR that, the applicant No.1 was also looking after the business of M/s. Trimurti Enterprises. The first informant's father decided to purchase one room through one Ramkrushna Jadhav in one of those buildings. The informant's father decided to purchase room No.1103 in building No.33 for Rs.2 lakhs, for which he had taken loan from Kulswami Credit Society, Vashi branch. The FIR mentions that, cheques were deposited in the bank account of M/s. Trimurti Enterprises. The FIR mentions that, in the year 2005 itself possession of that room was given by M/s. Trimurti Enterprises to the first informant. Initially, the informant was residing in that room and thereafter that room was given on leave and licence basis to different persons. In the year 2014 the same room was given to one Shankar Ghadge, who is a co-accused in this case, on leave and licence basis. In the year 2015, the informant wanted to reside in that room and, therefore, co-accused Shankar Ghadge was told to vacate the room. At that time, co-accused Shankar Ghadge told the informant that he had taken that room from the applicant No.3 and not from the informant's family. He showed an agreement to that effect entered into between M/s. Trimurti Enterprises and applicant No.3. The first informant realized that he was cheated. The room was fraudulently transferred in the applicant No.3's name and therefore this FIR is lodged.

(3.) Heard Ms. Shashikala Rajak, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri. Pednekar, learned APP for the State.