appellant Nos. 3 and 4 had purchased a plot in question bearing No. CTS 7395 B/3, ad-measuring 3642.73 sq. meter from one Ashutosh Satish Landge on 14th May, 2021. It is contended that appellant Nos. 3 and 4 were installing tin shed on the property purchased by them, but Girish Jadhav and others threatened the appellants and demanded protection money of Rs. 10,000/- each for this tenement, to which the appellants have refused to pay, therefore, with the help of informant and others the appellants are falsely implicated in the crime. It is contended that one Madan Purohit lodged a complaint against Girish Jadhav and others for the demand of protection money. It is also contended that Anita Gundu and others had given application to Superintendent of Police on 26.07.2021, wherein, the said persons alleged that no incident as alleged by the informant Bhagirath Bodkhe had taken place. It is contended that the modus operandi of Girish Jadhav is to grab the property and demand the protection money from the Stall Holders. It is contended that after the purchase of property, appellant Nos. 3 and 4 had given contract of fabrication for the installation of the Stall. Accordingly, six stalls were installed by the appellants, but Girish Jadhav and others were demanding money from the appellants. It is contended that appellant Nos. 3 and 4 are the political leaders, therefore, they are being dragged in the false case. It is contended that the appellants were not knowing Bhagirath Bhodke, therefore, they were not knowing his
