CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusRAMAN BHOLANATH DWIVEDI AND ANR.

                                                                   Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (STATE) NO. 17 OF 2022

                 Central Bureau of Investigation,
                 Banking Securities Fraud Branch, Plot No. C-
NAVNATH          35A, G-Block, Bandra- Kurla Complex, Mumbai-
SITARAM          400098.                                                 ...Applicant
WAGHMARE
                           Versus
Digitally signed 1. Raman Bholanath Dwivedi,
by NAVNATH
SITARAM          R/o. 102, Om Shri Ram Nagar CHS Ltd., Sai
WAGHMARE
Date: 2026.09.24 Baba Nagar, Bhayander (East), Dist. Thane.
19:25:10 +0530


                 2. The State of Maharashtra.                            ...Respondents
                                                ****
                 Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil a/w Mr. Anay Joshi a/w Mr. Digvijay S. Kachare
                 a/w Mr. Sumitkumar Nimbalkar for the Applicant.
                 Mr. Rajesh Singh a/w Mr. Iftekhar Sayed, Kamal Mishra, Rajesh Singh
                 & Associates for the Respondent.
                 Mr. D.J. Haldankar, APP for the Respondent/State.
                                                   ****
                                              CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J.
                                               DATE : 24th SEPTEMBER, 2026
                 P.C. :

                 1.       Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

                 2.       The Applicant/CBI is seeking leave to file appeal against
                 judgment and order of acquittal of Respondent-Accused No.1 dated
                 15.07.2022 passed the by Special Judge (CBI), Greater Bombay in
                 Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2012.

                 3.       The case of the prosecution in short is that on 23.02.1999 at
                 about 4:15 p.m. three constables attached to the Oshiwara Police


                 Navnath Waghmare                                                            1
                                                 Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



Station received information about illegal sale of counterfeit stamps at a
pan stall on Sahakar Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai, while they were on
patrolling duty. The said police personnel went to the spot at about 4:30
p.m. On seeing the police persons, Respondent-Accused No.1 attempted
to flee, he was chased and apprehended. The Respondent-Accused No.1
was taken to Oshiwara Police Station and in presence of two panch
witnesses, his body search was taken. That 160 revenue stamps, 3
court-fee stamps and 50 insurance stamps were recovered. Body search
memorandum and panchanama was done. First Information Report was
registered bearing No. 109/1999 for the offences punishable under
Section 258, 259 and 260 of Indian Penal Code,1860 ('IPC' for short).

4.       According to prosecution, during police custody, the Respondent-
Accused No.1 made disclosure statement on 28.02.1999 for which
memorandum of disclosure statement was recorded. The fact
discovered was that friend of the Respondent-Accused No.1 had given
revenue stamps and insurance stamps which were kept in his hut at RPF
Colony, Slum Area, Khar (West). Panchas, police persons and the
Accused went to the spot, which was shown by the Respondent-Accused
No.1. The Respondent-Accused No.1 went near the hut, opened the
door of the hut and brought 2 bags. In first bag, revenue stamp tickets
(Rs.1/-) total amounting to Rs. 64320/- were found. In the second bag,
revenue stamps worth Rs. 35680/- and insurance stamps (Rs.5/-) total
amounting to Rs. 24,000/- were found. The said stamps were seized,
signatures of panchas were affixed and recovery panchnama was
drawn. The stamps which were found on the body of the accused were
sent to India Security Press, Nashik for examination and as per the
report received, the seized stamps were found forged. Charge sheet was
filed.



Navnath Waghmare                                                           2
                                                    Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



5.      Suspecting foul play on the part of the Investigating Officer ('IO'
for short) PSI- Mr. Dalvi. That he did not conduct the investigation
properly and that he did not find out source of fake stamps and
investigation was found to be done in perfunctory manner, the case was
reopened by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in June 2003.

6.      As per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the case was
transferred to the Applicant/ CBI for further investigation. IO -PSI Dalvi
was added as Accused No.2. During investigation, it was concluded that
case is made out against the Respondent-Accused No.1 for the offence
punishable under Section 259 only. However, material collected did not
disclose any acts of omission or commission committed by Accused
No.2 PSI- Dalvi so as to call for his prosecution. The concerned Sessions
Judge vide order dated 10.07.2006 has discharged Accused No.2 Dalvi.
An independent charge under Section 259 of IPC was framed against
the present Respondent-Accused No.1.

7.      The        prosecution   examined   7   witnesses      and       relied   on
documentary evidence. The defence of Respondent-Accused No.1 is of
total denial and false implication

                                     SUBMISSIONS

8.       Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the offence
involved is serious. That after 5 years of investigation, SIT was formed
and thereafter matter was transferred to the CBI. That the recovery of
counterfeit stamps is not denied. That prosecution witnesses have
sufficiently proved the seizure of thousands of forged stamps. That the
house from where counterfeit stamps were found, was opened by the
Respondent-Accused No.1 using the key and therefore possession of the
house is well established. That the concerned Magistrate had convicted


Navnath Waghmare                                                              3
                                                 Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



the Respondent-Accused No.1 by well reasoned order and the same
should not have interfered with.

9.      On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent-Accused
No.1 submitted as under. That the existence of pan tapari from where
the accused was apprehended, has been found to be doubtful. That
there was no reason for the police team to patrol in civil dress and in a
private car. That PW-6 Panch has not even entered the house/hut from
where recovery is alleged. That the IO- PSI - Dalvi was exonerated. That
private car i.e. Maruti van allegedly used for patrolling is not identified
and its number is not mentioned. That there is no justification as to how
the accused identified and recognized the police in civil dress, because
he is alleged to have started running away on seeing the police. That
information allegedly received by Informant- PW-1 is not recorded in
station diary. That panch witness is not an independent witness because
he was referred by his pet name, clearly showing familiarity. That there
is no eye-witness for the story of Respondent-Accused No.1 being
accosted and apprehended. That key of the hut was kept on the upper
side of the hut clearly showing that many people had access and there
was no exclusive possession with the Respondent-Accused No.1. That all
the material contradictions as well as omissions are considered by the
Special Judge and Respondent has been rightly acquitted. That no
interference is required.

                        REASONS AND CONCLUSIONS

10.     I have considered the rival submissions and perused the
impugned judgment and order.

11.     Learned Judge of the Appellate Court has considered the aspect
of conscious possession of the counterfeit stamps with its knowledge of


Navnath Waghmare                                                           4
                                                Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



being forged to the accused.

12.     Learned Judge has considered that PW-1- Informant has not
remembered the color of the shirt and pant of the Accused No.1 and
that alleged pan stall/tapri had no board or name and it was a Kaccha
Tapri. Learned Judge has found that from the depositions of PW-1
(informant) and PW-4 Sunil Khot (who was with him on 23.02.1999,
when accused was apprehended), it emerges that there is inconsistency
about the time of receipt of information. It is not explained whether the
information was received in person or on telephone or through
messenger.

13.     The learned Judge has considered that the information received
by police constable on duty was not passed on or communicated to the
duty officer or to the concerned police station and there is no
corresponding station diary. It is found that the PW-1 informant, PW-4
along with another police constable have directly proceeded on the spot
on their own, without informing senior police official or maintaining
any station diary.

14.     Learned Judge has also considered that there is no explanation
for patrolling in private Maruti van and not in official police van.
Additionally, number of private Maruti van is not disclosed and driver is
also not examined. The learned Judge has recorded that admittedly the
police party was in civil dress and not known to the Accused No.1. The
learned Judge has considered that if the police persons were in civil
dress, how the Accused No.1 got impression about they being police and
started running remains unexplained. It is found that physical
description received in the information on the basis of which the
Respondent-Accused No.1 is nabbed is not recorded in the FIR. The



Navnath Waghmare                                                          5
                                                   Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



learned Judge has held that the existence of the alleged pan stall is not
proved. No statement of any witnesses is recorded about the existence
of pan stall. IO-Mr. Dalvi has admitted that he visited the spot on the
same day at about 8:30 p.m. i.e four hours after the incident, however,
he could not notice any pan stall at the place. The owner of any pan
stall or any other associated person with the place, where the Accused
No.1 was allegedly sitting for selling counterfeit stamps, was not
examined.

15.      The learned Judge has found that there is no explanation why
the Accused No.1 was not searched at the place after being
apprehended. PW-2- (Lingaraj Gauda) is panch witness of body search
panchnama, who has admitted in cross-examination that he does not
understand Marathi and cannot read and write as well. The panchnama
(in marathi) does not mention that it is explained to the panch witness
in the language familiar to him. Learned Judge has therefore found that
panchnama was also doubtful.

16.     Learned Judge has also considered that PW-2 panch witness has
admitted in cross-examination that when he visited the police station,
stamps were lying on the table; therefore, it is difficult to believe that it
was recovered in the presence of panch. The PW-2 has been found to
have subsequently proved his case that havaldar took search of the
Accused No.1 and from his pockets, stamps were recovered. Learned
Judge has also found that timing of the FIR is also doubtful.

17.     The stamps recovered from the accused on 23.02.1999 are found
to have been sent to Indian Security Press after unexplained delay of 73
days and no record is found as to where and in whose custody the
stamps were lying.



Navnath Waghmare                                                             6
                                                  Cri. ALS-17-2022 C2.doc



18.     So far as the recovery on 28.02.1999 is concerned, the
prosecution has examined PW-6 (Ramsagar Gupta) as panch witness.
Learned Judge has found that statement about keeping stamps at
residence made by the Respondent-Accused No.1 was recorded in
detection room. The learned Judge has found that key of the hut was
kept on the roof of the hut which is situated in crowded locality in
hutment area. Therefore, involvement of the other person or the friend
of the accused is also possible. Therefore, learned Judge has held that it
is difficult to infer that the Respondent-Accused No.1 had exclusive
possession of the place of recovery (hut). It is also noted that there is no
independent witness taken from the locality on 28.02.1999.

19.     The learned Judge has held that the aspect of opening of the lock
with the key is not present in recovery panchnama but it has cropped up
in the deposition of the witnesses.

20.     The learned Judge has also observed that if recovery of stamps
was done on 28.02.1999, why the stamps were not sent to India
Security Press till 03.07.2003. The stamps were lying in Malkhana room
of the Oshiwara Police Station and there are several entries pertaining
to the deposit of the stamps in the Malkhana room. The learned Judge
has held that why it was not sent to the India Security Press for about
more than 4 years, is not explained.

21.     In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in my view, it is not
necessary to scrutinize the evidence again in appeal. Therefore, no case
for grant of leave is made out. Accordingly, leave application is rejected.




                                         (M.M. SATHAYE, J.)



Navnath Waghmare                                                            7