Cri. Bail Appln. No.433 of 2022 (Or. Exh.1)
1 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK, AT – NASHIK.
( Presided over by Mr. M. H. Shaikh) Criminal Bail Application No.433 of 2022
CN R No. MHNS010015302022
Tabassum Irfan Shaikh
Age : 47 years, Occ.: Housewife
R/o : 101, Deolali Plaza, Lam Road, Deolali Camp, Tal. & Dist. Nashik. … Applicant/Accused.
V/S
State of Maharashtra Through – P.I. Deolali Camp Police Station (C.R. No.I19/2022) … Respondent/State.
Appearance : Ld. Adv. Shri. A. C. Pradhan for Applicant/Accused.
Ld. Adv. Shri. Sachin Gorwadkar for Respondent.
Shri. P. K. Gite, API (I.O.) is present.
ORDER BELOW EXH. No.1 (Delivered on 11 th April, 2022)
1.This is an application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code for grant of anticipatory bail in C. R. No.I19/2022 registered with the respondent Deolali Camp Police Station for an offence punishable under Sections 120(b), 406, 420, 465, 468 and 474 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2.Read the application and an affidavit filed in its support.
Perused the say filed by the respondent vide Exh.6. Heard Ld. Advocate for applicant, Ld. A.P.P. for State and I.O. in persons. So also gone through the policepapers produced for inspection by the I.O.
3.Ld. Advocate for applicant submits that, applicant is the wife of complainant and there are many litigations pending between the parties. He submits that, the complainant himself came at Nashik and prepared the document in favour of the applicant and the children. He submits that, the applicant has not committed any offence. He further submits that, nothing is to be recovered or discovered at the instance of applicant. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary.
Ready to abide by the terms and conditions. Therefore, prayed to allow the application.
4.Ld. A.P.P. submits that, applicant and other coaccused had forged the signature of the complainant and affixed his photo on the document and the used the xerox copy of that document before the Talathi for getting the property transferred in the name of applicant and her children. The said document is in custody of the applicant, which is to be seized. Custodial interrogation is necessary, Therefore, prayed to reject the application.
5.Upon hearing and going through the material placed on record, what can be gathered is that the applicant is the wife of the complainant. It is the case of the applicant that, complainant had been to Nashik and had executed the document of the property in favour of the applicant and her children. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent that complainant did not come to Nashik. Applicant and other coaccused forged the signature of the complainant and affixed his photograph on the document and got it executed before the Notary and thereafter got it true copy from the Special Executive Magistrate and used those documents before the Talathi to get the property of the complainant transferred in the name of applicant and her children.
Perusal of the policepapers reflect that, the Special Executive Magistrate stated that, he did not made an endorsement of true copy.
The seal, which is seen in the document is already deposited and new seal is prepared by him. Moreover, the applicant in her statement, stated that the complainant gave a document in view of the compromise took place between them. Therefore, what can be gathered is that, the document is in the custody of the applicant, which is required to be seized. Custodial interrogation is required to be made, as to how come the document came to be executed. The document is required to be confronted to the applicant while interrogation. Therefore, this Court finds that, discretion of prearrest bail can not be granted. In the result, the application fails, hence the order.
O R D E R
Criminal Bail Application No.433 of 2022 stands rejected and disposed off accordingly.
MUSHTAQUE Digitally signed by MUSHTAQUE HUSSAIN HUSSAIN SHAIKH SHAIKH Date: 2022.04.11 17:16:32 +0530 Place : Nashik. (M. H. Shaikh) Date : 11/04/2022 Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik.