Mr. Wasim Bin Mohammed , Vaseem v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.7186 of 2019 ORDER :

This Criminal Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner/A2, seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.118 of 2019 on the file of the S.H.O., Chandanagar Police Station, Cyberabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 r/w 34 IPC.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the innocent of the offences alleged and he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the alleged statement made by one Raghu Vamshi and no material or evidence is produced by the de facto complainant to the effect that the petitioner has committed the offences. He further submits that the de facto complainant has failed to produce any documentary proof that the petitioner has either forged her signature or prepared her stamp and filed any document before any authority. He further submits that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and is a permanent resident of Hyderabad, having movable and immovable properties and hence, there is no possibility of going out of jurisdiction of the concerned

Court. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the Court and hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State vehemently opposed the bail application.

5. As seen from the contents of the F.I.R. the de facto complainant came to know that some persons are using her stamp and her signature without her knowledge and one of the client called and asked her to provide OTP, which is required at the time of uploading the files for the approval process in GHMC through online. He has also confessed to her that he has approached one Lakshmikanth to get the Municipal drawings done and the said person has handed over the work as a sub-contract to the present petitioner. When she has approached the present petitioner as to how he has got signature and stamp, he has provided phone number. When she tried to call on the phone, she came to know that he has blocked the phone number. Thus, there are specific allegations against the present petitioner that he along with other accused cheated the de facto complainant.

6. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations made against the petitioner and also keeping in view the

facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner-A2 surrenders before the concerned Court within 15 days from today and move bail application after giving due notice to the Public Prosecutor, the same may be considered in accordance with law. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI DATED: 18.11.2019.

Hsd