SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Bom) 2594

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.S. Gadkari, J.
Mr. Ashok s/o Motilal Saraogi - Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1685 of 2015
Decided On : 20-11-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Shirish Gupte, A.P. Mundargi with A.H.H. Ponda, S.V. Marwadi, R.R. Varma.
For the Respondent: S.S. Kaushik, Subhash A. Borate, P.I. Azad Maidan.

The judgment establishes the seriousness of the crime, the exploitation of the judicial system, and the consequences of the applicant's involvement in a previous case.

Headnote:

Forgery - Criminal Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code Sections 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 200, 209 read with Section 120-B - The judgment discusses the fabrication of documents, conspiracy, and use of fabricated documents in court proceedings. The court's decision is influenced by the seriousness of the crime, exploitation of the judicial system, and the applicant's involvement in a previous case.

Fact of the Case:

The case involves the fabrication of documents, conspiracy, and use of fabricated documents in court proceedings. The applicant is apprehending arrest in a case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the applicant was involved in fabricating documents and exploiting the judicial system for monetary benefits. The court also noted the seriousness of the crime and the applicant's involvement in a previous case.

Issues: The issues revolve around the fabrication of documents, criminal conspiracy, and the exploitation of the judicial system for monetary gain.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is based on the seriousness of the crime, the exploitation of the judicial system, and the applicant's involvement in a previous case.

Final Decision: The anticipatory bail application is rejected, and the request for continuing the ad interim relief is also rejected.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. Gadkari, J.

The applicant is apprehending arrest in CR No. 288 of 2015 registered with Azad Maidan, Mumbai under Sections 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 200, 209 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The police Inspector Shri Haridas R. Kumbhar has lodged the first information report dated 17th October 2015 against the applicant and two other Advocates alleging that the applicant in conspiracy with other two Advocates namely Smt. I.V. Tauro and Shri Sohel E. Kazi with a view gain have monetary benefits, prepared forged and fabricated documents and used the same in the Court proceedings with a view to deprive Smt. Nickee Ashish Bagaria of her legitimate right. It is alleged that in furtherance of the said conspiracy the applicant along with other accused persons filed collusive arbitration petition in the High Court with a view to give legitimacy to the fraudulently procured bogus and/or fabricated award issued by the accused Advocate Sohel Kazi.

2. The facts germen to the lodging of the said first information report no. 288 of 2015 can briefly be summrised as under:

(i) Smt. Nickee Ashish Bagaria is the wife of Ashish Santoshkumar Bagaria and daughter-in-law of Santoshkumar Bagaria and Smt. Sushiladevi Bagaria. Mr. Vindokumar Jhunjhunwala is the uncle of Ashish Shantoshkumar Bagaria. Smt. Nickee Ashish Bagaria is the owner of the immovable properties bearing gut nos. 30,18, 52, 51(5) together with House Nos. 154, 155, 28, 24 and 31 lying and situate at village Kansal, Taluka Sudhagad, District Raigad.

(ii) Smt. Nickee A. Bagaria had executed powers of attorney in favour of Santoshkumar Bagaria and Ashish Santoshkumar Bagaria, the father-in-law and husband respectively. Though the copies of powers of attorney were handed over by her to her father-in-law and husband, the originals of the same were retained by her. That due to serious disputes, differences and ill-treatment meted out to Smt. Nickee A. Bagaria, she was constrained to leave her matrimonial house at Mumbai and had to go to Kanpur initially at her parents' house and subsequently she started residing at Delhi where she is presently working. That Smt.Nickee A. Bagaria by her Advocate's letters dated 22.9.2014 and 24.9.2014 revoked the said powers of attorney. It appears from record that, Smt. Nickee Bagaria initiated proceedings for domestic violence in a Court at Delhi.

(iii) The Bagarias' and Jhunjhunwalas thereafter mutually decided to deprive the said Smt.Nickee A. Bagaria of her legitimate right upon the properties described hereinabove which are standing in her name. They thereafter in connivance with the present applicant and other two accused persons prepared Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) purportedly dated 15.4.2010 entered into by and between the Bagarias on one side and Jhunjhunwalas on the other side including the said Smt.Nickee A. Bagaria wherein it was stated that the Jhunjhunwala had advanced a loan of Rs.92 lacs to purchase the said properties at village Kansal in the name of Smt. Nickee A. Bagaria. It was provided in the said MoU that the said properties shall always remain the join property of Bagarias and Jhunjhunwalas and upon sale of the said properties the Bagarias shall pay fixed amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore) to the Jhunjhunwalas over and above principal sum of Rs.92.85 lacs, even if the said property is sold for a lesser amount. It was further provided in the said MoU that in case of any disputes, the same shall be referred to Advocate Mr. Sohel Kazi (now accused) who shall be the sole arbitrator. As a matter of fact, the said Smt.Nickee A. Bagaria was not aware of any such MoU which was prepared on the basis of the powers of attorney executed by her in favour of her father-in-law and husband, after the said powers of attorney were terminated by her on 22.9.2014 and 24.9.2014 respectively as stated hereinabove.

(iv) In furtherance of their ill-designed plan, the Bagarias and Jhunjhunwalas in collusion and conni































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top