abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 426 OF 2008 Hassan Ali Khan .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondent Mr. A. Majeed Memon for the applicant. Mr.Borulkar, Public Prosecutor with Mr.Rajesh More, A.P.P. for the State. Mr.R.B. Raghuwanshi, Addl. Solicitor General of India with Mr.D.N. Salvi for respondents no.2 and 3. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 20TH FEBRUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with an offence registered at Worli Police Station under C.R. No.28/2008 punishable under sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 10(3) and 12(1) of the Indian Passports Act. - 2 - 3. At the outset, the Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and the Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents no.2 and 3 stated that the applicant is not present before the court and this court should secure his presence by exercising power under section 438(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the matter is urgent and the applicant is likely to be arrested if the hearing is adjourned and therefore should be taken up for hearing forthwith without insisting upon the presence of the applicant. In view of the urgency pleaded, taken up for hearing forthwith. 4. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant has obtained multiple passports in his own name from different places without disclosing that he was possessed of a valid passport. According to the prosecution, multiple passports have been obtained illegally and in breach of the Indian Passports Act under which a person is entitled to have only one passport. The Additional Solicitor General has provided the details of various passports obtained by the applicant as follows:- (a) The applicant applied and obtained a passport in the year 1986 at Hyderabad Passport Office which was valid till the year 1996. - 3 - (b) The applicant applied for a passport in the year 2000 at Hyderabad Passport Office and was issued the passport which is valid till the year 2010. (c) The applicant travelled to London (U.K.) presumably on the passport issued to him at Hyderabad. In London, he approached the Indian Embassy stating that his passport was misplaced and obtained a duplicate passport from the Indian High Commissioner, London in the year 2003. This duplicate passport was valid for a year. The applicant applied for renewal of the said passport in the year 2004 at Pune Passport Office. The passport was renewed and is valid till the year 2010. The fact of obtaining the passport in the year 2000 from Hyderabad Passport Office, obtaining a duplicate passport in 2003 from the High Commission, London and its renewal in the year 2004 from the Pune Passport Office is not disputed by the counsel for the applicant. (d) The applicant applied for a passport in the year 1997 at Patna Passport Office showing his residence at Patna. The Patna Passport Office issued passport bearing No.A-1519660 to the applicant which was valid till the year 2007. Learned Additional Solicitor General handed in computer digital print outs of the relevant pages showing the photograph and signature of - 4 - the applicant made on the application for obtaining the passport at Patna. The print outs are taken on record and marked "A" for identification. (e) The applicant applied for a passport at the Mumbai Passport Office on tatkal (out of turn) basis in the year 1998 and obtained a passport bearing No.B-2946019 from the Mumbai Passport Office on 7th September 1998, valid for one year. This passport was renewed by the applicant in the year 1999 and is valid till September 2008. Learned Additional Solicitor General also handed in computer digital print outs of the relevant pages of the application made by the applicant at Mumbai. The computer print outs are taken on record and marked "B" for identification. 5. The material produced on record prima facie shows that the applicant had obtained three different passports, one from Hyderabad (which was subsequently renewed and a duplicate of which was issued by the Indian High Commission, London), another from Patna Passport Office, and the third from Mumbai Passport Office, which is impermissible under the Indian Passports Act. 6. Learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that though the passport obtained from Hyderabad (and - 5 - renewed as mentioned above) has been seized, the original passports obtained from Patna and Mumbai are in possession of the applicant. Custody of the applicant is necessary for recovering the said two passports. He submitted that if the applicant is granted bail, the applicant is likely to flee the country by fraudulently using the said passports, though they have been cancelled as the cancellation is not endorsed on the passports which are still in possession of the applicant. I find merit in the submission. Since it is prima facie shown that the applicant has obtained multiple passports without disclosing that he had obtained and possessed valid passport issued earlier and the passports are to be recovered and there is apprehension that the applicant may flee the country by fraudulently using any of them, the application for pre-arrest bail deserves to be rejected. The application is accordingly rejected. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for stay of this order. Since I have rejected the bail, there is no question of granting any stay. Hence, the request for stay of the order is rejected. 8. Issuance of certified copy is expedited. - 6 - (D.G. KARNIK, J.)