Allowed

Pankesh Kalyan Tandel v. Union Territory of Dadra Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu

Bombay HC2 Nov 2023ABA/908/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to a Police Inspector facing charges of cheating and forgery. The offences involved submitting forged date of birth proofs. The court imposed conditions restricting travel and requiring cooperation with the investigation, citing remote possibility of tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Grant of bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with sureties, subject to conditions preventing flight, tampering, and ensuring attendance.

Pankesh Kalyan Tandel Vs Union Territory of Dadra Nagar… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

24-ABA-908-2023.doc

¶2

2023:BHC-AS:33775

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 908 OF 2023

¶5

Pankesh Kalyan Tandel … Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Union Territory of Dadra, Nagar Havel & Daman and Diu …Respondent

¶8

¶9

Mr.Zishan Quazi, Advocate for Applicant.

¶10

Mr.Hiten Venegavkar, Advocate for respondent-UT of DNH and DD.

¶11

Mr.M.G. Patil, APP for State.

¶12

CORAM : N.J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 2^ND NOVEMBER, 2023.

¶13

P C :

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶15

This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.16 of 2022 registered with Coastal Police Station, Moti Daman for the offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘Penal Code’).

¶16

1/5

¶17

Shraddha Talekar, PS

¶18

24-ABA-908-2023.doc

¶19

The indictment against the applicant, who was working as a Police Inspector, is that he had submitted two different proofs of date of birth to the Union Territory Administration and to the Regional Passport offce. One of those proof of date of birth must be forged. It was thus alleged that the applicant had deceived the Government agencies by using forged documents and dishonestly used those documents as genuine which he knew or had reason to believe to be forged.

¶20

The genesis of the offences seems to be in the disciplinary enquiry which came to be instituted against the applicant by Union Territory Administration. The enquiry was conducted interalia with the imputation that the applicant was over-aged at the time of the recruitment. In that context, the documents were allegedly forged.

¶21

Evidently, all the offences revolve around the documents

¶22

which are in custody of the Administration. The applicant was directed to appear before the Investigating Offcer by an order dated 12^th October 2023. The Court is informed that the applicant has appeared.

¶23

2/5

¶24

Shraddha Talekar, PS

¶25

24-ABA-908-2023.doc

¶26

This Court had granted interim protection by an order dated 30^th March 2023. As the offences revolve around documents, at this stage, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not seem to be warranted. Since the applicant was serving with the Union Territory Administration, the possibility of tampering with evidence seems to be remote. However, since there is an allegation that the applicant has obtained Portuguese citizenship, it would be appropriate to direct that the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate, Daman.

¶27

Hence, the following order :

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

(i) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R. No.16 of 2022 registered with Coastal Police Station, Moti Daman for the offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Penal Code, the applicant be released on bail on executing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶30

3/5

¶31

Shraddha Talekar, PS

¶32

24-ABA-908-2023.doc

¶33

(ii) The applicant shall co-operate with the

¶34

investigation and attend Coastal Police Station, Moti Daman Police Station on 8^th , 9^th and 10^th November 2023 in between 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 pm and thereafter, as and when directed by the Investigating Offcer.

¶35

(iii) The applicant shall furnish his specimen handwriting and signature, if directed.

¶36

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without the prior permission of the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate, Daman

¶37

(v) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court.

¶38

(vi) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the frst informant, any of the

¶39

4/5

¶40

Shraddha Talekar, PS

¶41

24-ABA-908-2023.doc

¶42

prosecution witnesses or any person acquainted with the facts of the case.

¶43

(vii) It is clarifed that these prima-facie observations are confned to determine the

¶44

entitlement to pre-arrest bail only.

¶45

(viii) The application stands disposed of.

¶46

[ N.J. JAMADAR, J. ]

¶47

5/5

¶48

Shraddha Talekar, PS

Pankesh Kalyan Tandel v. Union Territory of Dadra Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankesh Kalyan Tandel v. Union Territory of Dadra Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu

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

Harnish Surendra Chadderwala Vs State of Maharashtra

Ajit Uddhav Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Farjin Shahid Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra

Akshay Balasaheb Badade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rohan Balaso Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Karunesh Ramugrah Chaube Vs the State of Maharashtra