Mumbai, Maharashtra – October 6, 2022 – A Mumbai Sessions Court has rejected the bail application of Ashif Salim Mulla, a 22-year-old Bangladeshi national, accused in a case involving forgery, cheating, and illegal immigration. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Smt. C.V. Patil, denied Mulla’s plea, citing the gravity of the allegations and the high risk of him absconding to Bangladesh.

Mulla, also known as Ashik, was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 03 of 2022, registered at the Kalachowki Police Station. He is charged under sections 465, 466, 467, 468, 470, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), pertaining to forgery, document fabrication, and cheating.

Accusations and Defense:

Mulla, through his advocates Mr. Premal Krishnan, Mr. Abhishek Thoke, and Mr. Prashant Bothre of Pan India Legal Service LLP, claimed he was falsely implicated in the case. He alleged that the actual perpetrators were Rupesh Chaudhari, Raju Shaikh, and others, and that his sister was a victim of harassment at their hands.

In his application, Mulla detailed a narrative where his sister, married to Rupesh Chaudhari, was allegedly exploited and manipulated. He asserted that Chaudhari orchestrated the creation of false documents, including Aadhar and PAN cards, and facilitated the entry of his relatives from Bangladesh, including Mulla himself. Mulla specifically stated that Chaudhari was the one who arranged his passport.

Mulla argued that Chaudhari, despite being the mastermind behind the alleged offenses, was listed as a witness instead of an accused. He emphasized that his sister had a child with Chaudhari, attempting to portray himself as a concerned relative assisting a victim.

Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:

The Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), Juhu Branch, represented by APP Mr. S.V. Keknis, strongly opposed Mulla’s bail application. They presented evidence indicating that Mulla, a Bangladeshi citizen, had illegally entered and resided in India using forged documents. The prosecution highlighted that Mulla possessed fraudulent Aadhar cards, PAN cards, and school leaving certificates, which he used for travel within India.

The ATS argued that Mulla lacked any legitimate ties or relatives in India, posing a significant flight risk if released on bail. They asserted that his release would likely result in him absconding to Bangladesh, obstructing the trial process.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge Patil, after reviewing the charge sheet (PW/434/2022) and the arguments presented, acknowledged that the alleged offenses were triable by a Magistrate. However, she emphasized that the nature of the offenses, being non-bailable, was the primary consideration for granting bail.

While noting Mulla’s claims regarding Chaudhari’s involvement, the court highlighted Mulla’s admission of being a Bangladeshi national and his knowledge of using documents, despite being aware that they were obtained through potentially dubious means. The court found prima facie evidence of Mulla’s involvement in the offenses.

The court also dismissed Mulla’s argument for parity, stating that each bail application must be considered on its own merits.

The prosecution’s report revealed that the main accused, also a Bangladeshi national, was involved in illegally migrating Bangladeshi citizens into India and fabricating documents for them. Given the seriousness of the allegations and Mulla’s lack of residential ties in India, the court concluded that there was a substantial risk of him fleeing to Bangladesh if granted bail.

Outcome:

Consequently, the court rejected Mulla’s bail application, citing the potential for him to abscond and the severity of the allegations. The court’s decision underscores the seriousness with which authorities are treating cases involving illegal immigration and document fraud, particularly those with potential national security implications.

The case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by law enforcement in combating cross-border crime and the complexities involved in handling cases of foreign nationals accused of illegal activities within India. The decision serves as a reminder of the stringent measures in place to prevent such individuals from evading justice.