1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 2553 OF 2009 Shaikh Maheboob S/o Shaikh Imam Versus The State of Maharashtra. *** Mr. P. B. Rakhunde, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. P. M. Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** 1. Heard learned counsel extensively. In Crime No.44 of 2009, registered at Partur Police Station, district Jalna, for the offence under section 468, 471 and 420 of Indian Penal Code the accused seeks pre- arrest bail. 2. It was one Abdul A. Kazi, Director of Kokan Cooperative Marketing Bank, Mumbai who threw a gauntlet alleged against the present applicant that the present applicant Shaikh Mehboob is not belonging to Tadwi community and he canvassed that the certificate dated 2nd June, 1992 in favour of the present Applicant is false and it is deception. The benefits taken by the accused/ applicant Shaikh Mehboob, based on the said certificate, were a deliberate act to deceive several persons. 3. The matter was taken before the Caste Scrutiny Committee. There was finding against the accused/ applicant dated 17th January, 2004. In those proceedings, by virtue of the statutory arrangement prosecution was directed to be initiated against the accused/ applicant and based on the same, the Naib 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Tahsildar has, on the instructions of the Tahsildar, initiated the prosecution against the accused. 4. It is a matter of record, the judgment of Caste Scrutiny Committee negativing claim of the accused/ applicant for certificate dated 2nd June, 1992, was tested before this Court and also before the Apex Court, however, at all the places he lost and it was thereafter the prosecution is initiated. 5. The contention of counsel that under the Right to Information Act, he has an information (page 25) dated 27th January, 2004 that the certificate in his favour dated 2nd June, 1992 was signed by the then Naib Tahsildar, T. K. Tayade, who is no more. Counsel urged that since there was a certificate issued, there could not be a prosecution against the accused applicant and that too at a belated stage. It is a matter of record, the accused/ applicant was not belonging to Tadvi, but he fraudulently obtained the caste certificate and used it knowingly for personal gains. The application lacks merit. It is rejected. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:13/08/2009. ans/2553