MHNS010045542022 Order below Exh. 1 in Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1055/2022.

1.This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of Cr.P.C. in C.R.No. I­72/2022 registered against applicant Prashant Bapu Tajanpure at Mhasrul Police Station for the offence punishable under
sections 420, 406, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that for the purpose of sliding windows of the house of the complainant he paid Rs.52,000/­ to the applicant by Google Pay, however, he did not do the work of sliding and railing.

When, the complainant demanded his money back applicant threatened him that he will not give his money back and he should do what he wants. He is not scared of anybody and nobody can harm him. He threatened that if he again demands the money he will kill him. Thus, he was cheated.

3. It is contended by the applicant that he has local resident and there is no chance of his absconding.

There is dispute between the complainant and applicant due to which the work of railing and sliding as
not completed and applicant repaid the entire amount to the complainant. Applicant has also given cheque to the complainant for security purpose and complainant has filed case SCC No. 1620/2022 against applicant under N.I. Act. Nothing has to be recovered at the instance of applicant. He is not habitual offender nor convicted in any offence. He is the only earning member of his family. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions. Hence, prayed that application be allowed.

4.Say was called of Investigating Officer he has objected this application on the count that applicant cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.52,000/­ which has been recovered. They have to inquire about the amount which has been disposed off. Investigation has to be made about involvement of any other person. Hence, prayed that application be rejected.

5.Heard Learned Advocate for the applicant and Learned APP for the State. It is contended by the Advocate for the applicant that he has already repaid the amount by cash to the complainant, hence, nothing remains to be investigated. Already criminal complaint has been filed for dishonour of the cheque. Hence, prayed that application be allowed.

6.On perusing the FIR it is categorically seen that, complainant has alleged of cheating criminal breach of trust. Nothing has been brought by the applicant to reflect that he has made payment to the complainant by cash. Merely averting the same in argument will not suffice. Prima facie it is seen that complainant has made payment to the applicant for the purpose of railing and sliding of his house.

Investigating officer has contended that recovery has to be made. Detail interrogation is necessary.
Nothing has been brought to reflect that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. Thus, considering the nature of allegations, prima­ facie case is not made out by applicant for grant of pre­arrest bail. Hence, I pass the following order :­

ORDER

Application is hereby rejected.

Nashik.
Date : 30/08/2022.

Sd/­xxx (V.S.Malkalpatte ­Reddy) Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik.