Allowed

Sirhan Bin Faisal Bain Maazi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC20 Oct 2011ABA/734/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Bombay granted anticipatory bail to an applicant accused of forgery for providing conflicting birth places in passport applications. The court held custodial interrogation unnecessary and directed the applicant to surrender prior recorded bonds with surety.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to executing PR of Rs.5,000/- with surety in like amount and conditions to co-operate in investigation.

Sirhan Bin Faisal Bain Maazi Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.734 OF 2011

¶3

Sirhan Bin Faisal Bin Maazi ..Applicant. v/s. The State and anr. ..Respondents.

¶4

Mr.Hemant Surve and Mr. A.J.Kandarkar, advs. for the Applicant. Ms G.P.Mulekar, APP for the respondent/State.

¶5

CORAM : J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 20th October, 2011

¶6

PC :

¶7

1 The applicant seeks anticipatory bail in crime no.357 of 2010 registered with Worli police station for the offences punishable under sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 r/w section 34 IPC and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act.

¶8

2 It appears that in 1999 applicant had filed an application for passport wherein he had shown Ambad as his place of birth. As criminal case was pending against him at that time, passport was not issued. In the year 2000, he filed fresh application for passport wherein his place of birth was shown as Beed. That time passport was issued. In 2010 he filed an application for renewal of that passport. At that time, passport authorities

¶9

noted that in the earlier two applications he had shown different places of birth and, therefore, the offence came to be registered. According to the

¶10

¶11

applicant, correct place of birth is Beed and in 1999 he was residing at Ambad and by mistake, place of birth was mentioned as Ambad but he had no intention to commit any forgery or any other crime. He has also produced birth certificate from Municipal Council Beed. It shows that applicant was

¶12

born on 2.11.1968 at Beed. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the applicant is certainly not required.

¶13

3 Therefore, in the event of arrest in crime no.357 of 2010, the applicant be released on his executing PR of Rs.5,000/- with surety in the like amount with condition that he shall appear before the police as and when required and shall fully co-operate in the investigation.

¶14

4 Application stands disposed off.

Sirhan Bin Faisal Bain Maazi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sirhan Bin Faisal Bain Maazi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Namdeo S/O Shankar Sul

Subhedarsingh Shivmuratsingh Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dalbir Balwant Sote Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suman Builders and Developers Vs Prabhakar Jayram Ahire and Anr.

Satyawan Sukhedeo Godse Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhawana Ramesh Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra