The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to three people including former SP MLA Irfan Solanki.
A single-judge bench of Justice Rajeev Mishra passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Irfan Solanki and other.
These applications for bail have been filed by applicants Rizwan Mohammad, Mannu Rehman and Irfan Solanki seeking their enlargement on bail in Case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946, police station Moolganj, district Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
The Court noted that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 11.12.2022, a prompt first information report dated 11.12.2022 was lodged by first informant, namely, Anoop Singh and was registered as Case under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946, police station Moolganj, district East (Commissionerate) Kanpur Nagar. In the aforesaid first information report, five persons, namely, Rizwan Mohammad, Hina Khalid, Ruksana Rizwan, Khalid Majid and Arslan Mohammad (juvenile) have been nominated as named accused.
The gravamen of the allegations made in the first information report is to the effect that though all the five named accused are Bangladeshi Nationals yet four of them are illegally staying in India.
They are further alleged to have prepared documents to show that they are Indian Nationals. Fraud and forgery has been committed by them to procure public as well as private documents, on the basis of false information including residence proof.
After aforementioned first information report was lodged, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned Case Crime number in terms of Chapter XII CrPC.
He, accordingly, examined various witnesses under Section 161 CrPC and recorded their statements. Apart from above, various recoveries were also made by the Investigating Officer.
On the basis of above, he came to the conclusion that complicity of two not named accused, namely, Mannu Rehman and Irfan Solanki is also established in the crime in question. The named and not named accused were thus taken into custody. Ultimately, Investigating Officer on the basis of material collected by him during course of investigation opined to submit the charge-sheet.
He, accordingly, submitted the police report dated 24.04.2023 in terms of Section 173 (2) CrPC (charge-sheet), whereby named accused, namely, Rizwan Mohammad, Hina Khalid, Ruksana Rizwan, Khalid Majid and Arsalan Mohammad and not named accused, namely, Mannu Rehman and Irfan Solanki have been charge- sheeted under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946.
At the very outset, Anoop Trivedi, Senior Counsel appearing for accused- applicant Rizwan Mohammad submitted that co- accused Rukhsana Rizwan, Khalid Majeed and Mohammad Arsalan, who are children of the applicant Rizwan Mohammad, have already been enlarged on bail by court below.
It is then contended by the Senior Counsel that another named and charge- sheeted co-accused Hina Rizwan (wife of applicant Rizwan Mohammad) has also been enlarged on bail by the Court, by order dated 08.07.2024.
Apart from pointing out the recoveries that have been made from the person of applicant Rizwan Mohammad, or on his pointing out it was further contended by the Additional Advocate General that though Rizwan Mohammad is a Bangladeshi citizen along with his wife and children yet Aadhar Card in respect of children, namely Ruksana Rizwan, Khalid Majid and Arslan Mohammad were got made.
With reference to above, it was urged that in the Aadhar Card of accused- applicant Rizwan Mohammad issued on 21.11.2021, his date of birth is mentioned as 20.01.1975, whereas in his passport his date of birth is recorded as 02.09.1968. Marking has been made in the residence column with reference to the residence proof provided by MP/MLA/MLC/Municipal Councillor.
It was then contended that Hina Khalid is a Bangladeshi national yet she has submitted her income tax return for Assessment Years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23. In respect of Mohd. Adeeb, it is urged that LIC Policy has been issued in the name of Mohd Adeeb. Though mark-sheets are alleged to have been issued by Elan House Public School, Transfer Certificate of Park English School, Kolkata but the fact of the matter is that the student, in whose favour, aforesaid documents are alleged to have been issued, was never a student of Park English School, Kolkata.
Similar is the position with regard to Mohd Arsalaan son of Rizwan Mohammad. Reference was then made to the Transfer Certificate of the children of applicant Rizwan Mohammad in support of the submission that the same are also forged and fabricated as the children had not studied at Calcutta. Attention of the Court was also invited to the birth certificate dated 12.05.2017 issued by Nagar Nigam, Kanpur in respect of the children of applicant, namely Arsalan Mohammad; Mohd. Adeeb and Rukhsana Rizwan when admittedly, they were born in Bangladesh.
Reference was then made to the various statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC to show that calculated fraud was played by charge-sheeted accused to somehow or the other establish Bangladeshi Nationals i.e accused-applicant Rizwan Mohammad, his wife and children as Indian citizens.
On the basis of aforesaid submissions, the Additional Advocate General vehemently urged that considering the nature and gravity of offence i.e how Foreign Nationals are trying to sneak into this country, no indulgence be granted by the Court in favour of applicant Rizwan Mohammad. Though applicants Mannu Rehman and Irfan Solanki are Indian Nationals, they have connived with Rizwan Mohammad and his wife Hina Khalid for settling them in India illegally. fraud and forgery committed by the accused is writ large. In the totality of the circumstances, no case for grant of bail to applicants is made out. As such, the bail applications are liable to be rejected.
“Having heard the Senior counsel for the parties, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made, complicity of accused, the Court finds that the Investigating Officer, upon completion of investigation of concerned case crime number, has already submitted the police report/charge sheet in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicants and other charge sheeted accused stands crystallized, yet in spite of above, the Additional Advocate General could not point out any such incriminating circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicants during the pendency of trial, the judgment of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), most of the evidence relied upon by the prosecution against charge sheeted accused including applicants is documentary evidence, as such, in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail then in that eventuality, it cannot be said that applicants will tamper with the evidence, the Apex Court in the case of Mahdoom Bava Vs C.B.I, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 299, has held that where the prosecution primarily relies upon documentary evidence, then in such a circumstance, the accused should ordinarily be enlarged on bail, three of the co-accused i.e the children of Rizwan Mohammad were enlarged on bail by Court below, whereas co-accused Hina Khalid (wife of applicant Rizwan Mohammad) has already been enlarged on bail by the Court, the case of applicant Rizwan Mohammad is substantially similar and idential to co-accused Hina Khalid, in spite of vehement opposition by the Additional Advocate General, no distinguishing feature could be pointed out by the Additional Advocate General so as to distinguish the case of applicant Rizwan Mohammad from bailed out co-accused Hina Khalid, in respect of applicant Mannu Rehman, the Court finds that the accused is alleged to have issued two certificates but the same could not have been used for applying the Aadhar Card by other accused, the conspiracy element in the conduct of this accused can be examined threadbare during the course of trial, in respect of applicant Irfan Solanki, there is no evidence to the effect that the letter alleged to have been issued by the applicant on his letter head was not found to be under his signatures as per the opinion of the Handwriting Expert, considering the above, the applicants have made out a case for bail, therefore, irrespective of the objections raised by the Additional Advocate General in opposition to the present bail applications but without making any comment on the merits of case, applicants have made out a case for bail,” the Court observed while allowing the bail application.
Let the applicants Rizwan Mohammad, Mannu Rehman and Irfan Solanki, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the conditions, the Court ordered.