Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
MHCC02­008568­2022
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1572 OF 2022
IN
Criminal Case No. 234/PW/2022
Mr. Ajaykumar Sitaram Nishad,
Aged about 45 years, Occ.:­,
Residing at Number 2, Bhuli Katar,
Singh Nagar, Dhariya, Dhanbad,
State­Jharkhand, Pin Code­828111.

…Applicant/Accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of DCB CID, Unit­VII,
Mumbai vide C.R. No. 1/2022 / Bhandup
Police Station, Mumbai vide C.R. No.
9/2022).

…Respondent
Appearances :­
Ld. Adv. Mr. Fazil Hussain Shaikh for the Applicant/Accused.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijit Gondwal for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R. No. 37).
DATED : 6TH AUGUST, 2022.
ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicant Mr. Ajaykumar Sitaram
Nishad being accused in C.R. No. 1/2022 registered with DCB CID,
Page 1 of 6
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
Unit­VII, Mumbai (earlier C.R. No. 9/2022 registered with Bhandup
Police Station, Mumbai, for the offence punishable under Section 420,
465, 467, 468, 471, 120(b) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(hereinafter referred to as “I.P.C.”) seeks bail under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short “Cr.P.C.”).
2.

It is stated that, initially the offence was registered with
Bhandup Police Station by the complainant against four persons and
thereafter as on 07/01/2022, the investigation was handed over to DCB
CID, Unit­VII of Crime Branch, Mumbai. Thereafter, during the course
of investigation, the respondent agency had seized all the documents
from
the
alleged
applicant/accused
four
accused
persons
was
apprehended
and
and
accordingly
arrested.

the
The
applicant/accused categorically stated to the respondent agency that he
was introduced to the co­accused by one Mr. Narayan and that the
applicant/accused doesn’t have any knowledge about the alleged
transaction between the complainant and four accused persons, as
alleged. It is further stated that the applicant/accused had come to
Mumbai in the month of December 2021 for the purpose of his job and
in the meantime, had met one of the accused Mr. Anilkumar
Ishwarsharan Singh, who promised the applicant/accused to secure
such job for him in Mumbai.

The sleuth of the respondent agency
arranged a campaign at the hotel and the applicant/accused along with
the co­accused were put under arrest.
3.

The Learned Advocate for applicant/accused states that,
the applicant/accused is falsely implicated and that he doesn’t have any
criminal antecedents to his discredit. It is further stated that there is no
Page 2 of 6
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
material against the applicant/accused in order to connect him in the
present crime. Further the name of applicant/accused has not been
reflected throughout the FIR and that had merely stated for four
accused persons. It is further stated that the applicant/accused is a
teacher and well qualified, hence had come to Mumbai in the search of
a job. Hence, the Learned Advocate for applicant/accused prayed for
enlargement of the applicant/accused on bail.
4.

Per­contra, the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh­2
and inter­alia have resisted the application on various grounds. It is
categorically
stated
that
the
mobile
phone
belonging
to
the
applicant/accused had certain bogus documents, photographs and PDF
files and those were retrieved as on 21/01/2022 under panchanama.
Further the co­accused also was found with such photographs, word file
and PDF files in his laptop, which also were retrieved as on 22/01/2022
under panchanama. Therefore, from the data retrieved, it is evident
that the applicant/accused in connivance with the co­accused, has
cheated many such people and surprisingly the applicant/accused was
found to have created bogus documents pertaining to the RBI, Finance
Ministry, DRDO, ISRO, RAW, etc. Therefore, the Learned Prosecutor
apprehended abscondance and tampering of evidence at the hands of
applicant/accused. Hence, the Learned Prosecutor prayed for rejection
of application.
5.

Heard
Learned
Advocate
for
applicant/accused
and
Learned Prosecutor for the State. Perused the application and reply
along with the copy of charge­sheet produced by the applicant/accused.

Page 3 of 6
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
6.

Prior to entering upon the merits of the application, it is
evident that the applicant/accused has filed an application for similar
such relief before the Learned Trial Court­qua­the Learned Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade Court, Mumbai
and the Learned Trial Court therein has rejected the application of
applicant/accused for such enlargement on bail. It is apparent that the
earlier application was preferred post filing of the charge­sheet. In this
regard, the applicant/accused post rejection of the application by the
Learned Trial Court as on 21/06/2022, has failed to propel out any
such substantial change in circumstances.
7.

At this juncture, it is not expected to conduct a rowing
enquiry. On the contrary, what has to be located, is the prima­facie role
of the applicant/accused, if any.
8.

Considering the role attributed to the applicant/accused,
surprisingly it is noticed that the applicant/accused is involved in
forging the documents pertaining to all such high profile central
institutions. Further the record also reflects for such cheating by the
applicant/accused to number of persons and investigation pertaining to
that aspect, is under progress.
9.

The Learned Advocate for the applicant/accused has
claimed for the ground of parity, as one of the co­accused is enlarged on
bail. It is evident that in this regard my Learned Predecessor in office,
has observed that no role was assigned to the said individual, who was
Page 4 of 6
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
eventually enlarged on bail.

Thus, considering the records placed
before myself, without stretch of imagination, it can be inferred that
there is an active participation of applicant/accused in the present crime
and therefore, I hold that the application deserves no consideration.
Hence, order infra :­
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022 stands
rejected and disposed of accordingly.

DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 06.08.2022
Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2022.08.12
16:53:05 +0530
(DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R. No. 37).

Dictated on
: 06.08.2022
Transcribed on : 10.08.2022
HHJ signed on : 12.08.2022
Page 5 of 6
Criminal Bail Application No. 1572/2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
12.08.2022
04.52 p.m.

Geeta Mohite
Stenographer (Grade­I)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)

HHJ DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
06.08.2022
of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
12.08.2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
12.08.2022
Page 6 of 6