India
pti-PTI
A court here on Monday refused anticipatory bail to former Rajya Sabha MP Akhtar Hasan Rizvi in an alleged property fraud and forgery case, saying, prima facie, he is deeply involved in the crime.
A court denied anticipatory bail to former MP Akhtar Hasan Rizvi regarding alleged property fraud and forgery, stating he is a prime accused needing custodial interrogation. Rizvi faces charges under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly using fabricated documents and impersonating a deceased owner to seize property.
Additional Sessions Judge Mahesh Jadhav noted that the applicant is a prime accused and his custodial interrogation is necessary. Rizvi, a businessman, has been booked under Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for cheating and forgery for allegedly preparing false and fabricated property documents with the intention to deceive the complainant’s family by taking advantage of their illiteracy.
The original property owner, Hajani Noorbibai Kalu, died on April 26, 1971. Following her death, Rizvi allegedly presented a “false lady” to impersonate the deceased and execute a conveyance deed to grab the property, as per the police. Rizvi’s lawyer argued that the 84-year-old former MP is a reputed person with no criminal antecedents.
He used to sign blank papers for charitable purposes and hand them over to his employee, who misused his signatures to forge the document, the defence claimed. The lawyer argued that Rizvi had no ‘mens rea’ (criminal intent), received no wrongful gain, and was ready to execute a re-conveyance document in favour of the deceased owner’s heirs.
Opposing his plea, the prosecution submitted that Rizvi executed a registered document with malicious intent and admitted his signature on it. Detailed custodial interrogation was required to uncover the identity of the woman whom he presented as the deceased owner, and to investigate the potential involvement of revenue officers, the prosecution said.
After perusal of documents, the court noted that it appears the applicant succeeded to enter his name on the said disputed property on the basis of deed. “If the applicant is protected by the pre-arrest bail, certainly he will tamper with the prosecution witnesses. He is a prime accused, who is deeply involved in the crime. His custodial interrogation is necessary,” the court said while refusing him pre-arrest bail.
