Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: JUDGMENT 1 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
Received on : 26.11.2018
Registered on : 26.11.2018
Decided on : 17.12.2021
Duration : 03Ys. 00M. 21Ds.
Exh. : 37
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
22nd COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE)
(a) The serial number of the
case;
: C.C. No. 3142/PW/2018
CNR No. MHMM190123802018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 19.09.2018
(c) The name of the
informant
(if any);
: The State (Sahar Police Station in
C. R. No.288/2018).
(d) The names of the accused
persons and their
parentage and residence;
: 1)
2)
Mohd. Obedulla Mohiuddin
Alamuntsir
….convicted vide order
dated 13.06.2019
Amjad Ali Mohammad
Shafique Saifi
Age : 31 years
Occupation : Nil
R/at : Room No.610, SS2/A,
Sector1, Koparkhairane, Navi
Mumbai.
Native Address: Gram
Shivala Kala, beside police
station, PostNurpur,
Shivalakala, TalChanpur,
DistBirnaur, Utter Pradesh
...2/
-- 1 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 2 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
e) The offences complained
of or proved ;
: Under Sections 465, 468, 471,
420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
(f) The plea of the accused
and
her examination (if any);
: Accused No.2 pleaded not guilty
and claimed to be tried.
(g) The final order; : Accused No.2 is acquitted
(h) The date of such order; : 17.12.2021
APPEARANCE :
Ld. A.P.P. Mr. Khade for State.
Ld. Advocate Mr Bhagwan Mishra for accused No.2
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered 17.12.2021)
1. The above named accused person stands charged for
having committed an offence punishable 465, 468, 471, 420 r/w 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred
as 'I.P.C.').
2. The brief facts of the prosecution's case are, as
follows :
That on 19.09.2018 at around 10.30 hrs. at Immigration
Departure Wing, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport,
Andheri(E), Mumbai accused No.1 Mohammad Obedulla Mohiuddin
Almuntsir, in furtherance of common intention with the present accused
i.e. accused No.2 Amjad Ali Mohammad Shafique Saifi procured Indian
passport illegally by providing false and incorrect information and by
submitting forged document to Mumbai Passport office, committed
...3/
-- 2 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 3 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
forgery of passport for the purpose of cheating and fraudulently used
the forged passport as genuine, despite knowing the same as forged and
thereby cheated the Immigration Authority and Passport Authority by
possessing forged passport and the accused No.1 attempted to travel to
Yerevan(Aarmenia country) via Dubai.
3. Therefore, the informant on the same day lodged report in
respect of the aforesaid incident with Sahar police station. On the basis
of report C.R. No.288/2018 was registered under sections 465, 468,
471, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section14(a)(b)
of Foreigners' Act and Rule 9 of the Registration of Foreigners Rule,
1992. of IPC against the accused persons. Investigation of the case was
carried out by P.S.I. Shri. Rahul Shinde. After investigation he found
sufficient evidence against the accused, hence forwarded chargesheet
under above said sections.
4. Charge is famed against accused by my Ld. Predecessor on
01.02.2019. Accused No.2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In
view of above rival facts following points arose for my determination
and I recorded my findings against him for the reasons given below :
Sr. No. Points Findings
1] Does the prosecution further prove that,
on above date, time and place accused
No.1 in furtherance of common intention
with the present accused i.e. accused No.2
procured Indian Passport illegally by
providing false and incorrect information,
...4/
-- 3 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 4 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
by submitting forged documents to
Mumbai Passport Office and thereby
committed an offence of forgery and
thereby committed an offence punishable
under Section 465 r/w 34 of the Indian
Penal Code? In the negative
2] Does the prosecution further prove that,
on above date, time and place accused
No.1 in furtherance of common intention
with the present accused i.e. accused No.2
committed forgery of passport for the
purpose of cheating and thereby
committed an offence punishable under
Section 468 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal
Code? In the negative
3] Does the prosecution further prove that,
on above date, time and place accused
No.1 in furtherance of common intention
with the present accused i.e. accused No.2
fraudulently used the forged passport as
genuine, despite knowing the same as
forged and thereby committed an offence
punishable under Section 471 r/w 34 of
the Indian Penal Code? In the negative
...5/
-- 4 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 5 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
4] Does the prosecution further prove that,
on above date, time and place accused
No.1 in furtherance of common intention
with the present accused i.e. accused No.2
cheated the Immigration Authority and
Passport Authority by possessing forged
Indian Passport and attempted to travel to
Yerevan(Aarmenia country) via Dubai and
thereby committed an offence punishable
under Section 420 r/w 34 of the Indian
Penal Code? In the negative
5] What order ? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
5. Prosecution in the instant case has examined Mr. T. H.
Kapani as PW No.1 vide Exh5 and Investigating Officer as PW No.2
vide Exh25. Heard both sides at length.
AS TO POINT NOS. 1 to 4 :
6. Since the points are interrelated they are discussed
together for facilitation of the appreciation of the evidence on record.
PW No.1 Mr. T. H. Kapani deposed that on 19.09.2018 he was on duty
as counter officer at Departure, counter No. 36 at CSMI Airport and one
passenger by name Mohammad Muncahi Fahim approached him for
immigration clearance and after examining his documents he found that
he was traveling to Armania, Dubai and when he questioned him about
his purpose of visit to a particular country, he told him that he was
...6/
-- 5 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 6 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
going for tourist purpose, but his accent sounded to be Indian and
therefore he referred the said passenger to his senior duty officer and
wingincharge, who interrogated him and recorded his statement. That
they checked his baggage, they found two other Indian Passports in the
same name and PAN Card, Election ID, Adhar Card and secondary
marksheet issued from Gwalior Board, Birth Certificate issued from
Mumbai, etc. When they inquired more about him, he revealed that he
came to India on Bangladeshi Passport in the year 2013 through
Haridaspur which is in Bangalore and on the same passport he had
gone back to Bangladesh in 2015 and then he came back to India
without passport and he illegally crossed the border. That after he
reached Calcutta, he met his friend in Hyderabad, who arranged his
Election I.D. of India and after that he came back to Mumbai from
Hyderabad and the same agent arranged PAN card, Aadhar card,
passport, all Indian documents, etc.
7. In his further examinationinchief PW No.1 deposed that
when he inquired, the accused himself revealed that he is from
Bangladesh, he revealed his original name as “Mohammed Obaidullah
Al Muntasir' and with that name, when they checked from their system
Unique Case File (UCF), it was found that he was having Bangladeshi
passport in this name and he travelled to West Bengal in India via
Haridaspur in 2013. That accordingly, they went to Sahar police station
and lodged report. The FIR is at Exh12 is identified by him with his
signature and verified its contents as true & correct. The said passport
on which accused was supposed to travel, was in the name of accused
No.1 and it was marked as Exh6. The two marksheets, one is from
Mumbai and one is from Gwalior are admitted in evidence at
...7/
-- 6 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 7 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
Exh7 & 8. The ECR Status passport is admitted at Exh10. The extract
of station diary was admitted at Exh13, the statement of the accused
was admitted in evidence at Exh14, the two Boarding passes were
marked atExh.15 and Exh.16. The Evisa of Republic of Armenia was
marked at Exh.17. The Air Ticket was marked at Exh.18. The print out
from the system was marked at Exh.19. The electricity bill, Axis Bank
statement of Mohammad Muntasair Fahin was marked at Exh.20 and
Exh.2, migration certificate is at ArticleA. Examination certificate is
marked at Exh.22. Birth Certificate was marked at Exh.23.
8. In the crossexamination of PW No.1 on behalf of accused
No.1 all the suggestions were denied by the said witness. The cross
examination on behalf of accused No.2 was declined by the concerned
Advocate, Mr. Bhagwan Mishra.
9. PW No.2 is Rahul Prabhakar Shinde, PSI of the Sahar
Police Station, who is the Investigating Officer in this case, who
narrated how he made correspondence with the passport office, Worli
seeking copies of the documents, submitted by accused No.1 while
obtaining passport and sent the letter with the signature of Sr. PI vide
Exh26 and then he had made correspondence with the Shivajinagar
Police Station for verification of name and address of accused No.1 vide
letter vide Exh27 and the correspondence made with Secretary, Board
of Secondary Education, Madhya Bharat, Gwalior, for verification of
educational certificate. It was at Exh28 and that similarly, with the
Maharashtra State Board. It was at Exh29. He deposed that it was
reported by the Board that, the said certificate was fake, vide report at
Exh29. That the PW No.2 had made correspondence with Ward
...8/
-- 7 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 8 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
Officer, B.M.C. for verification of Birth Certificate found with the
accused No.1 and the said correspondence was marked as Exh30. He
again testified that accused No.1 disclosed that he had prepared all the
above documents with the help of accused No.2 and for that he paid a
consideration of Rs.40,000/ to the accused No.2 and therefore accused
No.2 was arrested.
10. The crossexamination on behalf of accused No.1 by the
Advocate Shri. Dilip Patil was declined, however there is
crossexamination on behalf of accused No.2 by Advocate Shri. Mishra.
In the crossexamination on behalf of the accused No.2 it was revealed
that the accused No.1 disclosed in his statement at Exh13, that fake ID,
passport, PAN Card, Aadhar card, birth certificate, SCC School
certificate, High school certificate and also opening the account in SBI
and Axis Banks statement was prepared by one person from Hyderabad.
It was admitted that he had recorded statement of accused at police
station, but he had not made any inquiry from the beggar, from Kurla,
who introduced accused No.1 with the accused No.2.
11. In his further crossexamination it was deposed by PW No.2
that after recording statement of the accused Nos. 1 & 2 he did not
record supplementary statement of informant Kapani. It was again
admitted by the Investigating Officer that during investigation he had
not collected any cogent evidence against accused No.2.
12. Comprehending all the evidence on record what crops up
for appreciation is that accused No.1 has been convicted in this case.
That he had pleaded guilty to the charges against him in the Jail Court
...9/
-- 8 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 9 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
and the said judgment is at Exh5. It is consistent case of the
prosecution that in the investigation it was revealed that the accused
No.1 was Bangladeshi National and he fraudulently obtained passport
by submitting fake documents.
13. Now, it is admitted by the PW No.1 Kapani that when the
accused reached Calcutta, he met a friend in Hyderabad, who arranged
for said documents and said documents were election ID, PAN card,
Aadhar card, etc. and said are the documents referred by the
Investigating Officer, PW No.2 as well, which were prepared by one
person from Hyderabad. Now, it is not the case of the prosecution that
accused No.2 is the person from Hyderabad and he is the same
person/agent, who made these documents. After such information was
received, all the connections between accused Nos. 1 & 2 were from one
beggar, that beggar's statement was not recorded and neither an inquiry
was made from that beggar. So, on what basis prosecution is claiming
that accused No.2 is the person, who forged documents, is not
explained by them. Very interestingly, the Investigating Officer himself
admits that during investigation he has not collected any cogent
evidence against accused No.2. If such is the case, and moreover as
accused No.2. Amjad Ali Mohammad Shafique Saifi is the resident of
Mumbai, then it was incumbent on the prosecution to give proof that
accused No.2 was earlier resident of Hyderabad and he is the same
person, who has forged these documents at Hyderabad. Neither PW
No.1 nor PW No.2 are deposing likewise that accused No.2 is the same
person from Hyderabad and had forged these documents. If none of the
witnesses are deposing this fact and when there is no other cogent
evidence on record, then the preponderance of probability is not in the
...10/
-- 9 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 10 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
favour of the prosecution, it is preponderating in the favour of the
accused No.2 only.
14. There is no scintilla of other evidence on record to bring
home the guilt on the accused person. Further PW Nos.1 & 2 are not in
the favour of the prosecution to nail the accused No.2, for that version
is available to nail accused No.1. Hence, the prosecution has failed to
prove that accused No.2 has provided incorrect information by
submitting forged documents to Mumbai Passport Office or he has
committed forgery of passport for the purpose of cheating or
fraudulently used the forged passport as genuine or cheated the
Immigration Authority and Passport Authority. Therefore, point Nos. 1
to 4 are determined in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 5 :
15. As the point Nos. 1 to 4 are determined in the negative and
as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt,
the accused No.2 is liable to be acquitted for the offences he is charged
with, and hence the following final order as under:
O R D E R
1. Accused No.2 Amjad Ali Mohd. Safique Saifi age: 31 years,
R/at: Room No.610, SS2A, Sector1, Koparkhairane, Navi
Mumbai is hereby acquitted vide Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. for
the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 r/w
34 of I.P.C.
2. The earlier P.R. bond of accused No.2 stands cancelled.
3. The accused No.2 is directed to execute fresh P.R. bond of
...11/
-- 10 of 11 --
JUDGMENT 11 C.C.NO.3142/PW/2018
Rs.15,000/ with direction that his earlier surety bond will
continue in force for six months, hereinafter as per Section
437(A) of Cr.P.C. to appear before the higher court, as and
when such court issue notice in respect of any appeal against the
judgment of this court.
4. The seized property, if any like passport be sent to the
concerned passport authority for revoking the passport. The
other seized documents be destroyed, after appeal period is
over.
(Judgment dictated on dais and pronounced in open court).
Date.: 17.12.2021
(A. A. Panchbhai)
Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai
*csj
Dictated on : 17.12.2021
Transcribed on : 21.12.2021
Signed on : 03.01.2022
.../
-- 11 of 11 --