Sirajuddin S/O Fakirahmed Mujawar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

( 1 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6918 OF 2014 Sirajuddin s/o. Fakirahmed Mujawar ..

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..

Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 7038 OF 2014 Vitthal s/o. Kisanrao Jamjal ..

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..

Respondents Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate for applicant in Cri.Appln No. 6918 of 2014.

Mr. G.S. Shembole, Advocate for applicant in Cri.Appln No. 7038 of 2014.

Mr. S.R. Palnitkar, AGP for respondent/State. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE & V.K. JADHAV,JJ.

DATED :

27.02.2015 P.C. :- 1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Various offences under sections 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of IPC are registered against the applicants and others. They

( 2 ) are accused of either forging documents or utilizing them as genuine one. The applicants before us are teachers in Zilla Parishad school in Nanded district. They produced transfer orders and got themselves benefited. It was subsequently revealed that the transfer orders were forged documents. It is also alleged that the applicants were aware that they were utilizing forged documents as genuine. The police papers are produced before us, but we could not find therein as to who is the forger of the documents. Mr. Talekar, learned Counsel for one of the applicants informed us that this case is a part of bigger scam. According to his information, he said that one higher officer of Zilla Parishad is also involved in this case. We hope that police would probe deeper to find out as to who are the perpetrators and book them. 2.

During the pendency of the investigation, the applicants secured anticipatory bail from the concerned Court. We are told that the Investigating Officer is facing difficulty in investigation due to their release on bail. We are also told that the Investigating Officer is now taking steps for getting the bail orders cancelled. These observations, however, would not mean that we are expressing our opinion on the propriety of the order granting applicants anticipatory bail etc.

( 3 ) 3.

On the face of it, the applicants cannot succeed in getting the crime quashed registered against them. The criminal applications would fail.

4.

The Criminal Applications are dismissed.

[V.K. JADHAV,J.] [A.V. NIRGUDE,J.] snk/2015/FEB15/cria6918.14