The applicant is thus alleged of being a part of the entire episode of impersonating Mrs.Gidwani in the consent terms which were filed in S.C. Suit No. 3032/2019.Tilak Prima facie, it can be seen that the applicant filed his vakalatnama and represented the so-called Ms.Pushpa Gidwani for the first time on 9/3/2020, and he was having her mobile number and as per the direction of the Panel Members of the Lok Adalat on 12/12/2020 he made a phone call on the said number and one lady appeared at the other end, who had introduced herself as Pushpa Gidwani and she was known to the applicant as the defendant in the Suit. The applicant claim innocence by stating that as a lawyer, he was not expected to go into the detail Identification as once the client approached and introduced herself to be so and so, there is no reason to disbelieve and even the vakalatnama which was signed by her was given to him which he filed in the Court. {Para 6}
7 There is no reason to disbelieve the applicant, as a lawyer was satisfied that the vakalatnama given to him and chose to represent the defendant in the Suit and even signed the consent terms. However, the learned APP state that the applicant has refused to divert the phone number of Gidwani to whom he had made a video call. Mr.Nikam state that the applicant shall render his co-operation to the Investigating Officer.In the above circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary and he deserve protection by way of interim order.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2174 of 2022
Date of Order: 18.08.2022
Rakesh Shrinath Dubey Vs. The State Of Maharashtra
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Bharati Dangre, J.
Citation: MANU/MHOR/121450/2022,2023 Lawweb (Bom HC ) 16.
1 The applicant, a lawyer by profession is apprehending his arrest in C.R. No. 404/2022 registered with Khar police station on 13/4/2022. The said C.R. invoke Sections 143, 147, 209, 427, 452, 465, 467, 468, 420, 452, 380, 471, 504, 506 of IPC along with Section 120B of the IPC.
2 Heard learned counsel Mr.Nikam for the applicant and the learned APP Mrs.Anamika Malhotra for the State. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant who is also desirous of filing an application for intervention, which he is permitted to do.Tilak 3 My attention is invited to the complaint which came to be lodged by one Dnyanesh Madhavrao Narhare who had recorded his statement in furtherance of the complaint lodged by Smt.Pushpa Gidwani.When the complaint is carefully read, the applicant an Advocate is accused of assisting impersonation of Pushpa Gidwani, and from the roznama of the proceedings which is placed on record, it can be discerned that in a S.C. Suit No. 3032/2019 filed by one Riyaz Khatri, Smt.Pushpa Gidwani was implicated as defendant. On 9/3/2022, consent terms were filed before the Adhoc Judge, Dindoshi, and on that day, the Court has recorded as under :-
âplaintiff present.Advocate N.B.Shukla for the plaintiff present Defendant present.Adv.Rakesh Dubey for defendant present.Exh. V/N filed by Adv.Rakesh Dubey on behalf of defendant,t.o.r Exh.6 Consent Terms filed by Adv.for plaintiff t.o.r With the consent of both the Ld.Advocates as well as plaintiff and defendant who are present before the Court, matter is adjd.(preponed) to 11.3.2022â 4 The learned counsel Mr.Nikam submits that the applicant filed his vakalatnama on the very same day when the Tilak consent terms were filed i.e. 9/3/2020 and a lady presented herself before him as Smt.Pushpa Gidwani and there was no reason for him to dispute her statement.
5 On 12/12/2020, the matter was listed before the Lok Adalat and the Panel members wanted to affirm the consent of the defendant as accorded to the consent terms and therefore, a Whatsapp Video Call was asked to be made. One lady appeared on the other hand and she was identified by the applicant as Ms.Pushpa Gidwani. The proceedings before the National Lok Adalat on 12/12/2020 record as under :-
âLearned advocate for defendant submitted that defendant is out of station. Hence, we panel members decided to confirm the Consent Terms by the defendant on Whatsapp video Call. Accordingly, the advocate for defendant, made Whatsapp video Call on his Mobile No. 9920050163.The lady talking on Whatsapp Video Call is identified by advocate for defendant. The son of defendant, Mr.Mahendra was also along with his mother. The consent terms shown to the defendant. She admitted her signature.The consent terms are explained to her in brief and she admitted the same to be true and correct. Hence, her appearance through Whatsapp Video Call is acceptedâ.
6 The applicant is thus alleged of being a part of the entire episode of impersonating Mrs.Gidwani in the consent terms which were filed in S.C. Suit No. 3032/2019.Tilak Prima facie, it can be seen that the applicant filed his vakalatnama and represented the so-called Ms.Pushpa Gidwani for the first time on 9/3/2020, and he was having her mobile number and as per the direction of the Panel Members of the Lok Adalat on 12/12/2020 he made a phone call on the said number and one lady appeared at the other end, who had introduced herself as Pushpa Gidwani and she was known to the applicant as the defendant in the Suit. The applicant claim innocence by stating that as a lawyer, he was not expected to go into the detail Identification as once the client approached and introduced herself to be so and so, there is no reason to disbelieve and even the vakalatnama which was signed by her was given to him which he filed in the Court.
7 There is no reason to disbelieve the applicant, as a lawyer was satisfied that the vakalatnama given to him and chose to represent the defendant in the Suit and even signed the consent terms. However, the learned APP state that the applicant has refused to divert the phone number of Gidwani to whom he had made a video call. Mr.Nikam state that the applicant shall render his co-operation to the Investigating Officer.In the above circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary and he deserve protection by way of interim order. Hence, the following order :-
Tilak O R D E R (a) In the event of his arrest, the Applicant â" Rakesh Shrinath Dubey in connection of C.R. No. 404/ 2022 registered with Khar police station shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties of the like amount.
(b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and should not tamper with evidence.
(c) The Applicant shall report to the concerned police station on 26th and 27th August 2022 and thereafter as and when called.Re-notify to 12/9/2022.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) Tilak
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment