1
B.A.348/24
MHCC020024802024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.348 OF 2024
Mohammed Ilyas Yakub Momin
Aged 40 years, Occ : Business,
Residing at CTS No.191/1/2,
Plot No.21, Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam Colony,
Takli Road, Near Godadmala, Miraj,
Sangli,
….Applicant
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Nodal Cyber
Police Station C.R.No.11/2023)
… Respondent
Appearance :Mr. Sudeep Pasbola h/f Adv. L.H. Atar Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Iqbal Solkar, APP for respondent.
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 07/03/2024
ORDER
This is an application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail in connection with
CR. No.11/2023 registered with Nodal Cyber Police Station for the
commission of offences punishable u/sec.419,420 465, 467, 468, 469,
471, 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(C), 66(D) of the
Information and Technology Act, 2000.

2
2.

B.A.348/24
It is the contention of the applicant / accused that he is
innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is
arrested on 04.10.2023. He has undergone custodial interrogation.
Nothing is to be seized or recovered from the possession of the accused.
The applicant / accused is a respectable member of the society. Charge
sheet is filed. Investigation is completed. Therefore, there is no point in
keeping accused behind bars till conclusion of trial. He is a permanent
resident of his given address therefore prayed for releasing him on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. If accused is released on bail it will affect the collection of
evidence. The investigation is not completed therefore if accused is
released on bail there are chances of flee from justice. If accused is
released on bail there are chances of threatening of prosecution
witnesses and tampering prosecution evidence. Hence, prosecution
prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant and ld. APP for the State.
5.

I have gone through the application, reply, documents filed
on record. It is the case of the prosecution that one Mr. Vidyadhar
Mahale the Personal Secretary to Dy. Chief Minister lodged report that
on 26.07.2023 he noticed that someone has created forged e-mail
account in his name and forwarded certain correspondence by said email in respect of transfer of some officers / engineers working with
Mahavitaran. Accordingly report is lodged and offence is registered. In
view of the said forged e-mail and letter transfer of six officers was
shown to have been made. Said letter also bears forged signature of Dy.

3
B.A.348/24
C.M. During investigation it was revealed to the police that the
applicant / accused is involved in the said offence. Certain forged
letters, medical certificate, letter of recommendation were found with
the applicant / accused. Some letters have forged signatures of some
political leaders / ministers.
6.

The investigation proceeded further, charge sheet has been
filed. It is the contention of the applicant / accused that in the
statement of witness, the amount is shown to have been accepted by
Firoz Shaikh. It is his contention that the prosecution witnesses are not
stating that they have paid money to the applicant. It is his further
contention that only mobile handset has been recovered. There is no
evidence that forged mail has been sent and documents has been
fabricated by the applicant / accused. The applicant in support of his
contention has relied upon the statements of witnesses Durgesh Jagtap,
Manish Dhote, Ganesh Asmar.
7.

The witness Durgesh Jagtap has stated that for the purpose
of cancellation of promotion he received the contact number of the
applicant. It was informed to him that the applicant is doing such work
regarding transfer and promotion. Said Durgesh had contacted the
applicant and at the demand of the applicant he transferred certain
documents required for the transfer. Durgesh further stated that the
applicant had demanded Rs.60,000/- for the said purpose. Said Durgesh
has deposited Rs.60,000/- in the account of brother of the applicant. It
is also contention of said Durgesh that the applicant had obtained letter
recommending his transfer from Minister Mr. Bawankule. In the
statement of Durgesh there is also contention regarding the applicant’s
involvement in the issue of transfer related to Mr. Dhote. It is also stated
4
B.A.348/24
by said witness Durgesh that the letter with the remark having signature
of Dy. Chief Minister was also prepared. Durgesh further stated that the
applicant of 21.07.2023 forwarded the recommendation letter of
Minister of Energy, the Government of Maharashtra.
8.

Witness Manish also stated in respect of such type of
correspondence received in respect of his transfer. Yogesh Aaher stated
about the person to whom there was contact in respect of transfer. In
statement of Dnyanoba Rathod there is reference of such forged letter
of ministers. Witness Musa Devshree also stated that the applicant /
accused assured him that he will do his work of transfer. He also stated
that the applicant handed over him the letter of re-commendation from
MLA Gadgil and asked him to submit the same in Mantralaya. This
letter also appears to be forged letter. It is also stated by him that on
01.03.2023 the applicant / accused forwarded photo copy of recommendation letter of MLA Mr. Gadgil addressing it the Dy. Chief
Minister. Said letter also bears the remark “DGP Mumbai do needful
immediately” and also bears signature of Dy. C.M. He further stated that
on 19.07.2023 he received photo copy of the letter on WhatsApp. Said
letter was addressed by the Minister Dadaji Bhuse recommending the
transfer of said witness Mussa Devshri. The witness Firoz Shaikh also
stated about active role of the applicant in the offence. His demand for
the amount for transfer and about the fabricated letters with forged
signature of the ministers.
9.

Considering the aforesaid material on record, I am of the
view that there is sufficient evidence against the applicant / accused
which will prove the offences alleged against him. The allegation and
nature of offence is that the applicant by creating false e-mail ID of the
5
B.A.348/24
personal secretary of Dy. Chief Ministers, forwarded false e-mail and
letters for transfer of the employees. There is fabrication of letters and
signature of Ministers including Dy. Chief Ministers. The gravity of
offence is very serious. The applicant has dared to forge the signature of
Dy. Chief Ministers and played with the administration of Government.
Considering the vital role played by the applicant and serious allegation
against him, there are every chances that he will tamper with the
prosecution evidence. If he is released on bail, he will be flee away from
the justice. Under these circumstances, the applicant is not entitled for
the bail. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.348 of 2024 is rejected and disposed off
accordingly.
Date : 07/03/2024
Dictated on
Transcribe on
Signed by HHJ on
: 07.03.2024
: 11.03.2024
: 13.03.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

6
B.A.348/24
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
15/03/2024
3.13 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri.
Room No.)
R.A. SASNE, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 07/03/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
13/03/2024
ORDER uploaded on
15/03/2024