1 wp2716.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2716 OF 2010 Mr. Jafar Hussain Sayed ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Respondents Ms. N.M. Baig – advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.P. Yagnik – APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED:- NOVEMBER 22, 2010. P.C. Learned APP on instructions states that on enquiry made with the office of Khandvikas Adhikari at Village Umaria, State of U.P., it transpires that birth certificate issued by the said Authority was on the basis of request made by the Petitioner’s son to change the date of birth of the girl as 10th June, 1994. The basis on which the said change was suggested is not forthcoming. Whereas, as per the original record, the date of birth of girl Nigar Fatima is stated to be 10th June, 1992. This presupposes that the request for altering correct date to 10th June, 1994 was made on 24th July, 2010 after the girl had gone missing on the earlier occasion on 15th July, 2010 and before her custody was given back to the 2 wp2716.10 parents on 11th August, 2010 by the Child Welfare Committee. If it is so, the local police officials to proceed against the Petitioner and his son for fabrication of record or such other offence which will have to be proceeded in accordance with law. The Investigating Officer to proceed against the Petitioner and his son also for being responsible for alteration of birth date of Nigar Fatima as recorded in the School Leaving Certificate issued by the Corporation Exhibit E-1 at page 16. 2. The Investigating Officer who is present in Court submits that the Petitioner and his son are not offering any explanation as to on what basis they requested to the Authority in the State of U.P. to alter the date of birth of Nigar Fatima as 10th June, 1994. In the event, the Investigating officer after due investigation is of the opinion that the Petitioner and his son were responsible for creation of false record only to justify their claim in the present Petition, shall file report in that behalf in this Court. If such report is filed, the Registrar of the High Court is directed to initiate action against the Petitioner for having used the fabricated document in the proceedings before this Court. That action will have to be proceeded independently on its own merits in accordance with law. 3 wp2716.10 3. We have made the above observation inspite of the request of the Petitioner made through Counsel that the Petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present Petition any more. The fact remains that the Petitioner by way of present Petition made this Court to issue directions to the local police on the assumption that the case made out in the Petition is genuine which it now transpires was false to the knowledge of the Petitioner. 4. Accordingly, Petition is disposed of on the above terms. The girl Nigar Fatima as well as her husband – Respondent No. 2 are present in Court. No further directions are required in view of the observations made by us in our order dated 7th October, 2010. (A.P. BHANGALE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)