IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN ITS CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISIDCTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETTION NO. OF 2024
DIST : RAIGAD

In the matter of Article 226 of the

Constitution of Indian r/w section
482 Criminal Procedure Code
And
In the matter of chargesheet
bearing Case number R.C.C. No.
______ Pending before the Hon’ble
J.M.F.C. Court at Pen, Dist. –
Raigad for offences punishable
under section 420, 465, 467,468,
471, 406 of IPC

`
Akil Hussainmiya Pathan )
Age years, Occupation : Business, )
Residing at A/202, Ankur Building, ) ... Petitioner /
Dist. – Raigad, 402107 ) Orig.
Complainant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra )
(at the instance of Pen Police Station, Pen )
Dist . – Raigad – 402107 )
in relation to C.R. No. 272 of 2023 )
...Respondent

TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE HON’BLE PUISINE JUDGES OF
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

`
 THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVENAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:
1. The Petitioner is the Original Complainant and the
Respondent is the investigating agency. The Petitioner is the
law abiding citizen and there is no single criminal antecedent
to his credit of Petitioner.

2. The Petitioner had lodged the FIR bearing no. 272/2023 for
offences punishable under section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of
IPC with the Respondent against Mr. Hasibur Rehman Syed
and during the course of investigation, the investigating
agency has made Mr. Habib Ibrahim Khot as one more
accused.

3. The Petitioner submits that the investigating agency has filed

chargesheet against Mr. Hasibur Rehman Syed and filed
report under section 169 of Cr.P.C. against Mr. Habib
Ibrahim Khot before the Hon’ble J.M.F.C. Court at Pen –
Raigad. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit – A is the copy
of chargesheet bearing R.C.C. No. 115/2024 pending before
the Hon’ble J.M.F.C. Court at Pen – Raigad along with report
under section 169 of Cr.P.C..

4. The story as alleged by the prosecution as under;

a) The petitioner, a regular customer at Respondent
No. 2’s shop, approached the respondent in June
2022 with an intent to purchase land for building a
house. Respondent No. 2 offered two properties for

`
 sale: one at Tambadshet (1 guntha, Survey No. 2/5)
and another at Mauje Ambeghar, Taluka Pen,
District Raigad (2 gunthas, Survey No. 210). To
support his claim, Respondent No. 2 showed the
petitioner a photocopy of the Satbara extract for
Tambadshet and the sale deed bearing No. P.A.N.
1628/2021. Believing the respondent to be the
legitimate owner, the petitioner agreed to purchase
the Ambeghar property for ₹8,00,000. However,
Respondent No. 2 later refused to proceed with the
sale. The petitioner engaged an estate agent, Shalom
Penkar, to verify the land documents from the Pen
Tehsil Office. Upon obtaining certified copies of the
Satbara extracts and sale deed, it was discovered
that Respondent No. 2’s name did not appear on the
Satbara extract for Survey No. 2/5 at Tambadshet,
which had been referenced in Sale Deed P.A.N.
1628/2021.The investigation revealed that
Respondent No. 2 had forged the Satbara extract to
falsely claim ownership of the properties. This
fraudulent act not only deceived the petitioner but
also constituted cheating against the government. As
a result, the petitioner suffered financial and legal
harm due to the respondent’s deliberate
misrepresentation and forgery.
b) Hereto annexed and marked
5. The Petitioner submits that the investigating agency has
recorded Request (Nivedan) Panchnama dated

`
 08/10/2023wherein it is mentioned that Accused Mr. Habib
Ibrahim Khot has prepared documents.

6. The Petitioner further submits that the forged entries on 7/12

extract are made in handwriting of Accused Mr. Habib
Ibrahim Khot but the investigation agency has released to the
Accused Mr. Habib Ibrahim Khot on evidence deficient
under section 169 of Cr.P.C.

7. That the Petitioner most respectfully approaches this Hon’ble

Court under it’s Writ and inherent jurisdiction amongst the
following other ground :-
a) The investigation agency releasing the Accused Mr.
Habib Ibrahim Khot on evidence deficient under section
169 of Cr.P.C. is illegal, contrary to the facts on record
and as such bad in law and it should be quashed and set
aside;

b) That the investigation agency failed to consider that the

handwriting on 7/12 extract belong to Accused Mr.
Habib Ibrahim Khot but the investigation agency has
taken neither take specimen sample of handwriting of
accused Hasibur Rehman PeerSayyed nor of Habib
Ibrahim Khot.

c) The Petitioner submits that while opposing Anticipatory

Bail Application (ABA), the investigation agency
objected for grant of bail and asked for custody of

`
 Accused Habib Ibrahim Khot on one of the ground of
handwriting sample but the investigation agency didn’t
taken specimen sample of the Accused Habib Ibrahim
Khot. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit – ____ is
the copy of report / say filed by the investigation agency
for opposing Anticipatory Bail. This is enough to raise
doubt creditability of investigation and the way the
Accused Mr. Habib Ibrahim Khot released escort free
under 169 of Cr.P.C.

d) That the investigation agency ought to consider that the

Accused Mr. Hasibur Rehman Syed while giving
Request (Nivedan) Panchnama, has admitted that the
documents have prepared by Accused Mr. Habib
Ibrahim Khot and has paid Rs. 62,000/- to the Accused
Mr. Habib Ibrahim Khot. This admitted evidence is
complete neglected by the investigation agency and
released the accused under section 169 of Cr.P.C.

e) That in support of the above-said Memorandum

(Nivedan), the Investigating Officer had recorded the
statement of Mr Sameer Rambhau Ghase, who was the
sole eyewitness to the transaction. The charge sheet does
not reflect the name of Mr Sameer Ghase as a witness,
but a very important piece of evidence, i.e., the
statement of Mr Ghase, is not annexed to the
Chargesheet. This is enough to show the conduct of the
Investigation Officer and the manner in which the

`
 investigation is being carried out.

f) That the Talathi, Mr. Vilash Mhatre, in his statement to

the police, stated that upon examining the 7/12 extract of
Gat No. 2/5 of Tambadshet, he concluded that the
handwritten content on the document does not match his
handwriting. He further stated that he is unable to identify
whose handwriting it is.However, the petitioner, in their
application dated 09/08/2024 to the police, specifically
informed them that the handwriting on the 7/12 extract
belongs to Habib Ibrahim Khot and further provided
specimen handwriting of Habib Ibrahim Khot, which
precisely matches the handwriting on the said 7/12 extract.
Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit _____ is the copy of
application of petitioner to police to take sample of
Handwriting of Habib Ibrahim Khot. Investingating
agencies had failed to consider the suggestion of petitioner
and have not taken specimen samples of habib Ibrahim
khot for forensic Science laboratory.

f) That the Accused Mr. Habib Ibrahim Khot was

Corporator and is politically connected, influential
person in the Raigad district and he has power to
influence investigation. Therefore, it is necessary to
investigate the present matter through the independent
investigating agency especially State Crime
Investigation Department;

`
 g) The Petitioner submits that on 16/01/2024, the Petitioner
issued a notice to the Pen Tahsildar, requesting an inquiry
and urging the suspension of Talathi (then working at Pen
Taluka) Accordingly, the Collector has conducted the
departmental enquiry and found that the Talathi is guilty
and thereby, the suspension order passed by the Collector
of Raigad District. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit
____ is the copy of order of departmental enquiry dated
_____________ and Exhibit _______ is the copy of
suspension order dated ___________ of the Talathi. The
investigation agency has not taken note of these order and
have not made then Talathi as Accused.

h) The Petitioner submits that the Collector has also found

other entries are bogus and order to remove name of
Abdulhamid Alimiya Attar, Nasir Badruddin Tade, Yasin
A.Qadir Khot, Sagir A.Qadir Khot, Hasibur Rehman Jalil
Ahmed Peersayyed. The investigation agency has made
Mr. Hasibur Rehamn PeerSayyed as Accused but other
name entered forgedly not being made as a Accused and
designated them as witnesses in the list of witnesses but
their statement are not annexed with the chargesheet. This
lapse on the part of investigation agency raises serious
concern about investigation.

i) That the investigating agency has failed to appreciate that

the Collector of Raigad district has suspended Talathi and
in displinary action, the said Talathi has been hold guilty

`
 of offence. That the investigation agency has failed to
investigate how the entries are made in the books of
Tahsildar records. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit –
C is the copy of suspension letter dated 04/07/2024 and
Exhibit – B is the copy of displinary action holding the
Talathi guilty.

j) xxxxx;

8. No other Writ Petition and/or Application on same ground,

has been filed before this Hon’ble Court or Supreme Court
of India.

9. The Petitioner is permanent resident of Pen, Dist. - Raigad.

10. It is therefore prayed that;

a) this Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit the Writ
Petition and issue notice to the Respondent;

b) that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct further

investigation through State Crime Investigation
Department under section 173 (8) of Cr.P.C. in
relation to R.C.C no. 115/2024 at the instance of FIR
baring no. 272/2023 for offences punishable under
section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC pending
before the Hon’ble J.M.F.C. Court at Pen – Raigad;

c) The Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and

operation of R.C.C no. 115/2024 at the instance of

`
 FIR bearing no. 272/2023 for offences punishable
under section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC
pending before the Hon’ble J.M.F.C. Court at Pen –
Raigad

d) the Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant the interim

relief in terms of prayer clause (c) at the time of
admission.

Such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court

deem fit and proper.

Sanjay Nayak
Advocate for the Petitioner Petitioner

VERIFICATION
I, Akil Hussainmiya Pathan, age about years, Occupation
: Business, resident of Khan Mohalla, Pen, Dist. – Raigad –
402107, the Petitioner above named, do hereby state on solemn
affirmation that whatever is stated hereinabove is true to the best
of my knowledge and belief.

Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai )

Dated this day of December, 2024 )
Petitioner
Before me,

`
Advocate for the Petitioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE

AT BOMBAY

IN ITS CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISIDCTION

CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2024

DIST : RAIGAD

Akil Hussainmiya Pathan

... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(Pen Police Station, Raigad) ... Respondent

`
 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION
Dated this day of December, 2024

Sanjay Nayak
Advocate for the Petitioner
Deval Chambers, Office No.9A, Ground Floor,
2nd Nanabhai Lane, Fountain, Mumbai-400 001
Mobile No.: 98694 88415
E-mail : advsanjayrnayak @gmail.com

Add with prosecution stroy

The Petitioner submits that the Government introduced a
resolution aimed at digitalizing land records and discontinuing
the practice of manual and physical entries in the 7/12 register. In
the year 2016, the scanned copies of the 7/12 extracts and
mutation entries were uploaded on the official
website ,i.e.,https://aapleabhilekh.mahabhumi.gov.in Upon the
completion of the scanning process in 2016, physical entries in
the handwritten 7/12 register were discontinued and the started
issuing digital copies of the 7/12 extract and its entries. The
Petitioner was surprised to discover that the names of Accused
Hasibur Rehman Syed not reflecting on the said 7/12 extract.

`
The said 7/12 extract at Pg. no. ____ to the chargesheet wherein
the Accused Hasibur Rehman Syed name reflecting and Pg. no.
____ of chargesheet showing true online copy of 7/12 extract.

Add with prosecution stroy

The Petitioner submits that on the basis of such forged and
fabricated 7/12 extract, the Accused Hasibur Rehman Syed and
other have purchased agricultural land and became Agriculturist.

Ground :
It is very important to note that the Accused Mr. Habib Khot in
connivance with other people namely, Abdul Hameed Alimiya
Attar, Nasir Badrudeen Tade, Sagir Abdul Qadir Khot, Yasin
Abdul Qadir Khot, have committed forgery of 7/12 extract but
the Investigation Agency once again committed defective
investigation and all left these people escort free. The Accused
Mr. Habib Khot who is working as a stamp vendor, having
access to record of Tahsil department and continuously
committing forgery in connivance with the Government Officer.

`
`