Bombay High Court
Majid Saeed Khan And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 April, 2024
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
2024:BHC-AS:18426
Gokhale 1 of 7 904-aba-990-24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 990 OF 2024
(1) Majid Saeed Khan,
(2) Yasmeen Khan. ..Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1626 OF 2024
Mohd. Khalik Khan ..Intervenor.
In the matter between:
(1) Majid Saeed Khan,
(2) Yasmeen Khan. ..Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents
______
Mr. Sunil R. Pandey a/w. Raju S. Mandal i/b. Priyanshu S. Mishra
for Applicants.
Mr. Avinash A. Naik, APP for State/Respondent.
Mr. Anvay Homkalas i/b. Mayank Mishra for Intervenor.
______
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 19 APRIL 2024
P.C. :
1. The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with C.R.No.245 of 2024 registered at Kherwadi Police
Digitally
signed by
VINOD
VINOD BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
2024.04.22
15:20:57
+0530
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
2 of 7 904-aba-990-24
Station, Mumbai, on 23.03.2024, under sections 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 474 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard Mr. Sunil Pandey, learned counsel for the
applicant, Mr. Avinash Naik, learned APP for the State and Mr.
Anvay Homkalas, learned counsel for the Intervenor.
3. The F.I.R. is lodged by one Mohammad Khalik Rajjab
Khan. He has stated that, he was married to Nazma Khan who had
passed away on 18.05.2020. They have two daughters. The F.I.R.
goes on to mention the names of the family members of the
informant's deceased wife. She had three brothers and five sisters.
The applicant No.1 was one of the brothers. The applicant No.2 is
his wife. The allegations are in respect of the shop No.7 and Stall
No.30 at Pakmodia street. The gist of the F.I.R. is that, both these
applicants submitted the false documents with MHADA and
claimed themselves to be the sole owners of the property. There
are allegations that Nazma's mother Zahida Begum had passed
away in the year 2009. Thereafter all the brothers and the sisters
were the legal heirs to that property, but that property was
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
3 of 7 904-aba-990-24
usurped by the present applicants. There are allegations that, they
had shown as if Nazma Khan was still alive in the year 2014 and
submitted some applications before the MHADA and Saifi Burhani
Upliftment Trust (SBUT). It is alleged that, from 2012 to 2019 they
prepared forged documents in collusion with MHADA officers and
the Trustees of SBUT to usurp that property. On these allegations
the F.I.R. was lodged.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the
deceased Zahida i.e. the applicant No.1's mother was residing with
the Applicant Nos.1 and 2. They were taking care of Zahida. The
rent receipts were issued in the Applicant No.1's name and this
was to the knowledge of the other sisters and brothers. Learned
counsel submitted that the Applicant No.1 has already filed R.A.D.
Suit No.508 of 2023 against the SBUT, his brothers and sisters and
even against the first informant and his two daughters as the legal
heirs of the deceased sister of the applicant No.1. He submitted
that the said suit is specifically for the declaration that the
Applicant No.1 be declared as the lawful tenant in respect of the
suit property i.e. Shop No.7, Parsi chawl. This suit was filed on
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
4 of 7 904-aba-990-24
03.04.2023. After this, the F.I.R. was lodged on 23.03.2024 to
pressurise the applicants.
5. Learned APP produced the investigation papers before
the Court and he relied on the letter dated 26.11.2019 addressed
to the Vice President of MHADA. The letter was purportedly sent in
the name of Zahida on 26.11.2019, but she had passed away in the
year 2009. The said letter bears a forged signature of Zahida.
Learned APP, therefore, submitted that this clearly shows that the
forged documents were created and used. There are other
documents in respect of the Stall No.30 wherein the Applicant
No.2 had made applications to the authorities claiming ownership
of that particular Stall No.30. Learned APP also relied on the
report of MHADA authorities in respect of the inspection
conducted in the year 2014, wherein it is mentioned that Zahida
herself was present on the premises. He submitted that all these
documents show that forged documents were created and used by
the Applicant Nos.1 and 2.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the first informant
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
5 of 7 904-aba-990-24
supported all these contentions. He submitted that the offences of
forgery and cheating are clearly made out.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the
Stall No.30 was an unauthorised stall and it was demolished,
therefore, that is not an important issue. His only contention is
about the Applicant No.1's right as the tenant in shop No.7
mentioned herein above, which is also the subject matter of the
civil suit filed by the Applicant No.1.
8. I have considered these submissions. Zahida had
passed away in the year 2009. From that point onwards there does
not appear to be serious effort taken by the informant or the other
brothers and sisters of the applicant No.1 for claiming that
property. They have not filed any civil suit claiming their rightful
ownership or the declaration that they were the tenants in the said
shop No.7 at the time of passing away of Zahida. The report of the
MHADA authorities is from the year 2014. There are some
documents tendered in the year 2019. More than five years have
passed. Some of the documents are in English and some of the
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
6 of 7 904-aba-990-24
documents were prepared by MHADA. In this background, after
about 10 years from the report of the MHADA and about 5 years
after the documents were allegedly used, there is a long gap. Apart
from that, the documents are in English and in the legal format.
Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants is right in submitting
that the applicants may not be aware of the contents because they
are not educated. It is also important to note that the applicant
No.1 has already approached a competent Court to establish his
rights. Therefore, his right as a tenant in respect of the said
premises is an issue which will be decided by the competent civil
court. Considering all this background, after all these years, the
applicants' custodial interrogation is not necessary. The documents
are already in possession of the investigating officer; they can
continue with their investigation. The applicants will have to co-
operate with the investigation by remaining present before the
investigating agency and by giving their hand-writing samples. It is
made clear that, this order is restricted only for consideration of
this anticipatory bail application. The rights of the parties in
respect of that shop cannot be and are not decided by this order.
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::
7 of 7 904-aba-990-24
9. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
i) In the event of their arrest in connection with C.R.No.245 of 2024 registered at Kherwadi Police Station, Mumbai, the applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing P. R. bonds in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each (Rupees Thirty Thousand each Only) with one or two sureties each in the like amount.
ii) The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called and shall cooperate with the investigation.
iii) The Application is disposed of.
iv) With disposal of the main application, the Interim application No.1626 of 2024 is also disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2024 23:07:04 :::