Dismissed¶18

Joysen S/O Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury v. State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Gittikhadhan Dist Nagpur

Bombay HC2 Dec 2025ABA/712/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application rejected; ABA 712/2025; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; Justice Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi; decided 02/12/2025; Joysen s/o Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury; Crime No. 542/2025 P.S. Gittikhadan Nagpur; Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 IPC; Section 12 Passport Act 1967; complainant Sandip Munnar Yadav, Regional Passport Office Nagpur; applicant resident of Bangladesh; two Indian passports on bogus and forged documents; six bogus documents Aadhar Card PAN Card Ration Card Election Card Bank of Badodha pass book school bonafide certificate; custodial interrogation necessary; victim-of-agent plea rejected; advocates K. Y. Mandpe (applicant) and A. Ghogare A.P.P. (State).

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was rejected. ¶18

Joysen S/O Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:13436

¶2

1 9.aba.712.25

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 712/2025

¶5

Joysen s/o. Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury Vs. State of Maharashtra

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Mr. K. Y. Mandpe, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. A. Ghogare, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State.

¶10

CORAM : MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI,J. DATED : 02/12/2025.

¶11

. Heard.

¶12

The applicant has apprehension of arrest in Crime No.542/2025 registered with Police Station Gittikhadan, District Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967.

¶13

It is the case of the prosecution that complainant namely Sandip Munnar Yadav is working with the Regional Passport Office, Nagpur has lodged the First Information Report that the present applicant had been in his Office and informed that he is resident of Bangladesh and he had came to India on many occasions from the year 2011 and returned back to Bangladesh. He is in possession of two Indian passports which are prepared on the basis of bogus and forged documents. On that basis, the First Information Report came to be lodged.

¶14

The learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is the victim. The agent has given him the Indian passport. He is ready to cooperate the investigating machinery. Hence, prayed to protect the applicant by granting anticipatory bail.

¶15

2 9.aba.712.25

¶16

The learned A.P.P. has opposed the application stating that the applicant is not having any authorization to leave in the India and he has not produced any valid passport and visa issued by the Competent Authority. The applicant has procured and prepared six bogus documents i.e. Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Ration Card, Election Card, Pass Book of Bank of Badodha and Bonafide Certificate of School. As the applicant is not a citizen of India and on the basis of forged documents he entered in India, his custodial interrogation is necessary. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

¶17

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶18

Though the applicant has stated that he himself is a victim and on the basis of bogus documents i.e. Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Ration Card, Election Card the applicant is claiming citizenship of the India, his custodial interrogation is necessary. Hence, the application is rejected.

¶19

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)

¶20

RGurnule

Joysen S/O Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury v. State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Gittikhadhan Dist Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joysen S/O Sunil Barua @ Chowdhury v. State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Gittikhadhan Dist Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak S/O Madhukar Malwe Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Borgaon Manju Police Station Dist Akola and Anr.

Vitthal S/O Dattaram Ingole vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Manora Dist Washim

Nandu S/O Shankar Bhalavi Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Range Forest Officer, Khapa Tah Saoner, Dist Nagpur

Suhas Appasaheb Patil vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manoj Ashruba Godbole vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Balaso Kadam vs State of Maharashtra