The Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications where the applicants were accused of procuring a fabricated caste validity certificate to secure admission in an engineering college. The court held that thorough investigation and custodial interrogation were necessary given the nature of the offence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:BHC-AUG:27036
1 ABA1500&1498.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
6 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1500 OF 2024
MOHAMMAD USMAN S/O AKBAR ALI CHAUDHARI VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Dhage Vaibhav B. APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. A. Shinde
WITH
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1498 OF 2024 SHUBHAM SAIBU PALLE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER … Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Dhage Vaibhav B. APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. A. Shinde
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 18th NOVEMBER, 2024
PER COURT:
2 ABA1500&1498.24
16.06.2015, stating that the caste validity certificate is not issued by the said committee. In pursuance of this, the FIR is registered against the applicant. Since, instant case relates to fabrication of the document and usage of the same in getting admission and having completed BE, it would not be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail. Thorough investigation and custodial interrogation is necessary. In view of the above, Anticipatory Bail Application No.1500 of 2024 is dismissed.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.]
marathe
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail is warranted in a case involving fabrication of caste validity certificate for college admission.
MOHAMMAD USMAN S/O AKBAR ALI CHAUDHARI
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
SHUBHAM SAIBU PALLE
ARUN R. PEDNEKER
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
