B.A.1862/2022
MHCC020101312022
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1862 OF 2022
IN
C.R. NO. 61 OF 2020
Suresh Jagubhai Patel @ Sukha Patel
… Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of BKC Police Station, Vide
C.R.No. 61/2020)
…Respondent.
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Mr. H. J. Mehta for the Applicant.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for the State/ Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 30TH AUGUST, 2022
ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicant Suresh Jagubhai Patel @
Sukha Patel being accused in C.R.No. 61/2020 registered with BKC
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471,
420 of Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”) read with
Page 1 of 5
B.A.1862/2022
Sections 12(1) of Passport Act, seeks bail under Section 439 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).
THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;
2.
It is the case of the prosecution that, the informant is
gainfully employed in Police Department as Sub Inspector at Costal
Road Police Station, Kadaiya, Nani Daman.
It is alleged that the
informant received the information of the crime pertaining to C.R.No.
39/2018 under Section 341, 302, 120(B), 34 of IPC alongwith Sections
25 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act. During the course of investigation
the accused Suresh Jagubhai Patel @ Sukha Patel was declared
absconding by the Court and accordingly a lookout notice was issued. It
has further revealed that, the said accused had availed passport from
the passport authorities under the No. K6738548.
Accordingly, an
investigation pertaining to the documents filed and relied with the
passport authorities by the said accused were verified and it revealed
that said documents were forged, bogus and frivolous and on the basis
of the same the accused had availed such passport.
Accordingly,
offence was registered and the applicant/accused was put under arrest.
3.
The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the
applicant/accused is falsely implicated and has no connection with the
present crime.
It is further stated that, police have seized all the
documents and also the original passport is in the custody of the police
and therefore, there are no chance of the applicant/accused absconding
or travelling out of India.
The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused
states that, as the offence registered against the applicant/accused is
not punishable with life or death, he is entitled for bail. Hence, the Ld.
Page 2 of 5
B.A.1862/2022
Advocate for applicant/accused prayed for enlargement of the
applicant/accused on bail.
4.
Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh.2
and inter alia have resisted the application upon various grounds. It is
categorically stated that, in order to avail a forged and bogus passport
the applicant had tendered bogus documents to the passport authorities
including generation of a fake bank passbook.
The prosecution has
brought on record a list of criminal cases registered against the
applicant/accused and it is evident that 32 offences are registered
against the applicant/accused under various crimes. The prosecution
further apprehends that, if the applicant/accused is enlarged on bail, he
might tamper the prosecution evidence and would abscond. Hence, the
Ld. Prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.
5.
Heard learned advocate for Applicant/accused, and learned
prosecutor for the state. Perused application and reply.
6.
On meticulous examination of the case papers it evinces to
myself that, admittedly the applicant/accused had tendered such fake
documents in order to avail the passport. Moreover, the said fact is not
categorically denied by the applicant/accused. On the contrary it is
stated that, the original passport of the applicant/accused is seized by
the sleuth of respondent agency. If, the said passport is not denied to
be availed by the applicant/accused documents upon which the
applicant/accused relied are found to be forged, bogus and fake. This
ipsofacto disentitles applicant/accused from any such relief of
enlargement on bail.
Page 3 of 5
B.A.1862/2022
7.
While deciding an application for bail it is settled that the
Court is required to see whether the primafacie case exists or not. It is
not necessary to make roving enquiry or examining the merits of
prosecution case.
8.
It is evident that, the documents upon which the
applicant/accused has relied are allegedly forged by him which also
includes for the document pertaining to his place of residence in
Mumbai and bank passbook. Apart from the same the prosecution has
brought on record 32 such criminal antecedents registered with various
police stations under various crimes which speaks in quantum with
regard to the conduct of the applicant/accused. In view of the same his
role in availing such passport upon false, fake and forged documents
cannot be negated and in my considerate view granting of bail would
naturally derail the momentum of investigation. Therefore, I do not
find this as a fit case for grant of bail. In the backdrop of the aforesaid
facts, I hold that the application deserves no consideration.
Hence,
order infra:
ORDER
Bail Application No. 1862/2022 stands rejected and
disposed of accordingly.
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 30.08.2022
Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date: 2022.09.07
17:26:33 +0530
(DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)
Dictated on
: 30.08.2022
Transcribed on : 05.09.2022
HHJ signed on : 07.09.2022
Page 4 of 5
B.A.1862/2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
07.09.2022
05.25 p.m.
Mahendrasing D. Patil
Stenographer (GradeI)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
30.08.2022
of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
07.09.2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
07.09.2022
Page 5 of 5