No proof of cheating, forgery against Nawab Malik’s son, his wife: Court

Prima facie there is nothing to indicate that NCP leader Nawab Malik’s son Faraz and daughter-in-law, Laura Hemelin alias Ayesha Malik, “had indulged in cheating and creating bogus documents”, the sessions court has said while granting anticipatory bail to the couple

Prima facie there is nothing to indicate that NCP leader Nawab Malik’s son Faraz and daughter-in-law, Laura Hemelin alias Ayesha Malik, “had indulged in cheating and creating bogus documents”, the sessions court has said while granting anticipatory bail to the couple.

No proof of cheating, forgery against Nawab Malik’s son, his wife: Court

Sessions judge MG Deshpande on Monday grated the bail but a detailed order was available on Wednesday. “Prima facie it appears that there was absolutely no intention, mens rea (criminal intent) to cheat the authorities as alleged in the FIR,” the court said.

The couple was booked for allegedly submitting a forged marriage certificate to obtain a long-term visa for Hemelin, a French national.

Their pre-arrest bail plea said they had been cheated by the agent they had employed to get the certificate. They also claimed that the agent, Vijay Kumar Rai alias Vijay Kumar Thakur, had cheated several others and he had been arrested as well.

“The alleged bogus marriage certificate was created by Vijay Kumar Rai@Vijay Kumar Thakur. Therefore, custodial interrogation of both accused for recovery of computer, stamps, printer, and the paper used for preparing the alleged bogus marriage certificate, arrest or police remand of both the applicants is not necessary, as all this prima facie appears to be with Vijay Kumar Rai@Vijay Kumar Thakur and the same can be recovered from him,” the court said.

The judge also criticised the investigating officer for opposing the bail plea claiming that the couple’s remand was necessary for custodial interrogation.

“The investigating officer has already formed opinion and intended to arrest both the applicants, and further wants their remand from the court. There is absolutely nothing to indicate how and why he has arrived at this conclusion. All this further indicates that the investigating officer has not given any consideration to the guidelines (laid down by the Supreme Court),” the court added.