MHCC020039782022
IN THE SESSIONS COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.688 OF 2022
(CRIME NO.25 OF 2022, DADAR POLICE STATION)
CNR No.MHCC02-003978-2022
Md. Zallauddin S/o. Mohd. Tamizuddin, ]
Age : 25 years,
]
R/o. : Ward 12, Mehsaul Gate Mehsaulurf ]
Rampur Lachmi Sitamsarhi, Bihar–843 302.]
… Applicant/
Accused
Vs.
State of Maharashtra,
(Dadar police station).

]
]
… Respondent/
Complainant
Appearances :Mr. Sunil Lalla a/w. Mr. Raj Jagasia, Ld. Advs. for applicant.
Mr. J. N. Suryawanshi, Ld. A.P.P. for respondent/State.
CORAM : PURUSHOTTAM B. JADHAV,
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM NO.22.
DATE : 5th April, 2022.
ORDER
1.

This
is
an
application
for
regular
bail.

The
respondent/State resisted it by filing say at Exh.2. Read the application
and say. Heard both sides. Perused the record.
Addl. Sessions Judge
-2-
2.

BA 688/22
In the F.I.R., it is alleged that the mother of the first
informant was admitted in the Hospital from 13/09/2021 to
15/09/2021 and during the said period, Dr. Brijesh Gupta has prepared
fake E.C.G. document and also, got prepared fake Covid-19 test report
from Thyrocare Lab. And thereafter, constrained to take medical
treatment in the Symbiosis Hospital, Dadar (W). On such report, Crime
No.25 of 2022 came to be registered for offence punishable under
Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3.

Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that no role
of the applicant is specified in the F.I.R. or remand applications. It may
be noted that the name of the applicant is shown as accused in column
No.7 of the F.I.R. The occupation of the applicant is shown as Lab
Technician. In the further investigation, the Investigating Officer seized
the mobile of the applicant wherein text messages and the documents
are sent to other accused. Considering these circumstances, it cannot be
said that there is no involvement of the applicant.
4.

It is true that the bail application is resisted on the ground
that the applicant is not permanent resident of Mumbai and therefore,
he would not be available for the trial. It is also submitted that other
accused are yet to be arrested. These cannot be grounds for rejection of
bail application. Learned A.P.P. submitted that there is possibility of
tampering of witnesses and the investigation is at initial stage. It may
be noted that the anticipatory bail application filed by this applicant
came to be rejected by this Court. Learned A.P.P. submitted that after
registration of F.I.R., the applicant tried to bribe the first informant by
transferring amount of Rs.5,000/- via Google Pay which was
Addl. Sessions Judge
-3-
BA 688/22
immediately re-transferred by the first informant. Learned Advocate for
the applicant submitted that there is no material on record to show that
the said amount was transferred by the applicant. However, it may be
noted that one of the grounds for rejecting anticipatory bail was that
there was possibility of tampering of witnesses. This finding is not
challenged by the applicant. Learned Advocate for the applicant
submitted that the stringent conditions may be imposed and there is
also remedy for the police to apply for cancellation of bail in case of
breach of condition. It may be noted that the investigation is in
progress and if the applicant is released on bail and he tampers the
witness, the Investigating Officer would not be able to collect the
material in the investigation. Considering these facts, I am of the
opinion that it would not be proper to release the applicant during the
investigation. Hence, I pass the following order :-
ORDER
Bail Application No.688 of 2022 is rejected and disposed
of accordingly.
Digitally signed
by
PURUSHOTTAM
BHAURAO
JADHAV
Date:
2022.04.06
17:27:33 +0530
Date : 05/04/2022.

( Purushottam B. Jadhav )
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURT,
GREATER MUMBAI.

Directly typed on Computer on : 05/04/2022.
Printed on
: 06/04/2022.
Signed on
:
Addl. Sessions Judge
-4-
BA 688/22
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
06/04/2022 at 5.30 p.m.

NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Bahushruta Y. Jambhale
Name of the Judge ( With Court H.H.J. Shri. Purushottam
Room No.)
Jadhav (Court Room No.22)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ORDER
of 05/04/2022.

JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
06/04/2022.

JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
06/04/2022.

Addl. Sessions Judge
B.