Forgery of Bombay High Court order: Two arrested by Police
An attempt to stall the attachment of property following default on a loan of over Rs 2 crores by showing a forged Bombay High Court stay order has led the police to arrest a Pune-based businessman and his son, reports TOI.
The forgery came to light last month, when a Division Bench of Justices AA Sayed and Prakash D Naik noted that the alleged stay order could not have been passed since there was no sitting on the alleged date of the order.
"... alleged order dated 28th January, 2020 … is on the face of it a forged and bogus document. On 28th January, 2020 no such order was passed by this Bench. As a matter of fact no such Bench was constituted or sitting on 28th January, 2020."Bombay High Court
Therefore, the Bench had proceeded to direct that a case be filed immediately in the matter.
"The forgery and fabrication of the order of the High Court is a serious matter which needs thorough investigation. We therefore direct the Registry to file First Information Report in this regard with the Azad Maidan Police Station immediately for appropriate action."Bombay High Court
Following this, the Azan Maidan police have now reportedly arrested 58-year old Vasant Mishrilal Parakh and his 28-year-old son, Vipul, who have been remanded to Police custody until Monday.
It is further reported that following default in the payment of a loan from TATA Capital Financial Services Ltd in 2018, a district Court had eventually ordered the attachment of their properties. Prior to this, a writ petition filed by the Parakh in the High Court had already been been dismissed in 2016, as per the Division Bench order passed last month.
[Read the Bombay High Court order]
Recently, another similar instance of forgery led Justice GS Patel to order and internal investigation into the matter. In that case as well, the forgery became all the more evident after it was found that it was passed on a day when the High Court was not sitting - a Sunday.
Additionally, Justice Patel had also detailed several irregularities in the forged error made in his name - from the formatting of the text and typographical errors to the fact that mentioned a fictional High Court division termed the "Revenue and Property Division" - before concluding that, "There is no manner of doubt that the entire document is not only a forgery but a clumsy one."