KANCHAN K RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present applicant is apprehending arrest at the hands of Amboli police station in CR No.184/09 for the offence punishable under sections 416, 420, 465, 467, 468, ., 120-B of IPC. It is the case of the prosecution that one Rajmani was residing in slum area when the same was to be redeveloped under SRA scheme. However Rajmani was not given flat under the said scheme. It is then claimed that the present applicant, on the basis of forged document has got flat transferred in her name. According to the applicant the complainant herself has executed the agreement so also the power of attorney and other documents in the years 1994 and 1998 and there under assigned the rights in the said property in favour of the applicant. The prosecution case is founded on the premise that the said Rajmani is wholly illiterate and cannot sign and hence these documents are taken to be forged and fabricated. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has instituted a suit in the City Civil Court with a view to protect her possession in regard to the same property and in the said suit application for temporary injunction was filed. An affidavit in reply has been filed in the City Civil Court by the complainant Rajmani and it is stated in para 13 of the reply that Ex.A the sale deed dated 28.12.94 does not bear the signature of Rajmani. After denying the signatures on the relevant documents the complainant has asserted that she has an old ration card in which her signature appears and her signature can be compared with the said admitted signature. Thus a categoric stand is taken by the complainant in the city suit that the old ration card bears her signature. And the disputed signatures could be compared with admitted signature on old ration card, meaning thereby the complainant can sign. The entire premise on which the prosecution is founded appears prima facie to be erroneous. Learned counsel for the applicant possesses an information which is referred to in para 10 of present petition. The learned APP seeks time to examine this aspect of the matter and file appropriate written reply. In the result by an interim order I direct that in the event of arrest of the applicant in CR No.184/09 the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/with one or two sureties in the like amount. The applicant shall abide by conditions stipulated under section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. Stand over for two weeks. This order shall operate till then.