TARKESHWAR GORAKNATH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant seeks to be released on bail in Crime No. 184 of 2010 registered at Bhayander Police Station for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 r/ w Section 34 of the I.P.C..

(2.) Offence was registered on the basis of report lodged by Arun Ganeshlal Jain. As per the report, the present applicant and his wife had entered into an agreement to sell flat no.202/A wing, Second Floor, Chadrakant Residency, 150 road, near Maxus Mall, Bhayandar for a consideration of Rs.28 lacs. Amount was paid to him by cheques and transfer of the money from the account of the complainant to the account of the accused. Accused also executed sale-deed in favour of the first informant and when he went to take possession, flat was lying vacant. First informant put his lock. Two days after that when the first informant went there he found that one Parvez Siddiqui was in occupation of the flat and on enquiry he told that he had purchased the said flat from the present applicant. During the investigation it was revealed that the present applicant had sold the same flat to four different parties under registered sale-deeds, therefore, applicant was taken in custody on 8.2.2010. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed. He was never granted bail.

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant contends that on 28.4.2010, charge was framed against the present applicant and two other accused and the matter was adjourned to 10.5.2010 for recording of evidence with the direction that summons be issued to the witnesses. It appears that on 10.5.2010 witnesses were present, however, on that date adjournment was sought by the accused persons and, therefore, matter was adjourned to 18.5.2010. On that day again accused made a request for adjournment. On 1.6.2010 applicant was not produced from jail. On 14.6.2010 witnesses were absent. After some adjournments on 5.8.2010 accused persons engaged an advocate to defend them. On 17.8.2010 witnesses were present but they were not examined. Matter was adjourned on several occasions from 17.8.2010. The first informant Arun was present on number of dates but every time matter was adjourned without recording his evidence. During the trial, the accused no.3, who is wife of the present applicant died. According to the learned counsel for the applicant so far the trial has not commenced. However, after taking instructions, the learned APP makes a statement that in January, 2011 examination-in-chief of the first informant was recorded and now it is fixed for cross-examination on 22nd February, 2011.