No bail to man for falsely claiming to know MHADA authorities

The sessions court on Thursday rejected the bail application of a 52-year-old man from Kurla who allegedly duped a couple of ₹6 lakh by claiming to know authorities from the MHADA in 2021.

MUMBAI: The sessions court on Thursday rejected the bail application of a 52-year-old man from Kurla who allegedly duped a couple of ₹6 lakh by claiming to know authorities from the MHADA in 2021.

HT Image

“Considering the nature of the offence, the role played by the applicant/accused in the commission of the alleged crime, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case in which discretion can be exercised in favour of applicant/accused. Hence, I have declined to release him on bail,” additional sessions Judge SN Patil said while rejecting the bail.

On November 2, 2011, accused Irfan Sayed got in touch with the informant, Mohammed Kazi, who intended to buy a house in his wife’s name. Sayed assured Kazi that he knew higher authorities from MHADA and would get Kazi a one-room house at a reasonable rate from the VIP quota.

Accordingly, Sayed showed Kazi a one-room house in Mumbai Central and asked for a total sum of ₹35 lakh. After a little deliberation, Kazi agreed to pay the same. Kazi paid an initial amount of ₹9 lakh to Sayed, hoping he would speak with the concerned authorities. Subsequently, Sayed handed Kazi an allotment letter.

The accused then asked Kazi to bring two demand drafts of ₹17,19,900 and ₹2,75,000 respectively for paying registration charges. However, when Kazi reached MHADA office with the said demand drafts, the officers informed him that the allotment letter was forged as the authority had not issued any such letter.

On much insistence by Kazi, the accused returned an amount of ₹3.65 lakh, however, refrained from paying the rest. Following this, Kazi lodged an FIR at Nehru Nagar Police Station for offences punishable under sections 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 465 (punishment for forgery), 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record), and 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Kazi prayed for bail on the grounds that he was falsely implicated in the case and that he had no criminal antecedents, adding that he was suffering from high blood pressure and diabetes.

However, the prosecution vehemently opposed the bail underscoring the applicant’s criminal antecedents, adding that the investigation was still at initial stage and that the amount was yet to be recovered.