Bombay High Court
FRANCISCO FERNANDESversusTHE STATE OF GOA THR THE POLICE INSPECTOR AND ANR
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that there was no prima facie case against the applicant and therefore granted pre‑arrest bail under Section 482 of the BNSS.
Summary
The applicant, Francisco Fernandes, was implicated in alleged forgery of land‑record mutation documents concerning three properties in Colva, based on a complaint by family members. He applied for pre‑arrest bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after an anticipatory bail petition was rejected. The prosecution argued that custodial interrogation was necessary to identify the person who impersonated the applicant before a notary. The Court examined the FIR, noting that the allegations stemmed from a family dispute and that the applicant was abroad during the period the forged documents were allegedly prepared, finding no prima facie case. It held that custodial interrogation would not aid the investigation and that the applicant could be secured without arrest. Consequently, the Court granted pre‑arrest bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 482 BNSS in view of the alleged forgery offences.
- Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 229(1), 233, 319(2), 336(3), 340, 35, 482, 61(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- forgery
- land record mutation
- family dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-GOA:1729
CRMAB-28-2026
Andreza
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (BAIL) NO. 28 OF 2026
Francisco Fernandes … Applicant
Versus
The State of Goa thr the Police Inspector
& anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Sahil Sardessai, Advocate with Ms. Sweta Pereira, Advocate
for Applicant.
Mr. S. Karpe, Additional Public Prosecutor with Ms. Riddhi
Shirodkar, Advocate for Respondents-State.
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 25th AUGUST 2026
ORDER
1. The Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (‘BNSS’) in relation with
Crime No. 33 of 2026, dated 06.06.2026 and registered before the
Fatorda Police Station, South Goa, Margao, for offences punishable
under Sections 229(1), 233, 319(2), 336(3) and 340 read with Section
61(2) of BNSS.
2. The investigation was set on motion on the basis of the
information given by one Royson Da Costa and Mrs. Gayle Diniz,
alleging that in September 2024, informants checked the Record of Rights
Page 1 of 5
25th August 2026
CRMAB-28-2026
of three properties of Survey Nos. 129/3, 129/8 and 129/9 of Village Colva,
Salcete, Taluka, on which they learnt that Dyllan Robin Diniz and Melissa
Aida Fernandes, had mutated their names in the column of occupants in
Record of Rights behind back of the informant. On inquiry with the office
of the Mamlatdar as regards to aforesaid mutation, it was revealed that the
mutations were purportedly signed by Mr. Dyllan Robin Diniz and also
filed affidavits purportedly sworn by him in Margao, in each of the
said three mutation cases. Each of the mutation applications and
supporting affidavits, were filed between 05.07.2024 to 16.08.2024. It
is accordingly revealed that the Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 2,
presently residing in United Kingdom (UK), submitted mutation
applications containing forged signatures to include their names in Land
Records at the Office of Mamlatdar, Margao. The Accused No.4 and
Accused No. 5 unlawfully notarised false affidavits and supporting
annexures certifying physical presence of Accused No. 1.
3. In pursuance to the aforesaid complaint, Crime no. 33 of 2026 came
to be registered with Fatorda Police Station for all above referred offences.
4. It is contention of the Applicant that on 17.06.2026, when police
personnel visited the Applicant's residence to serve a notice under
Section 35 of the BNSS, the Applicant has immediately filed
Page 2 of 5
25th August 2026
CRMAB-28-2026
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 63 of 2026 before Additional Sessions
Judge-I, South Goa, which came to be rejected vide Order dated
17.07.2026. Hence this application.
5. Mr. Sahil Sardessai, learned Advocate appearing for Applicant,
would submit that Applicant resides in UK in pursuance of his employment.
He has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. There is partition
dispute amongst the family of the Applicant and informant. The only
allegation employed against the Applicant is that Applicant applied on
18.03.2024 for previous mutation records of Survey No. 129/3 and 129/8 at
Office of Mamlatdar showing Melissa’s address as owner and approached
Mrs. Savita Kurtarkar to notarise certain annexures to mutation. There are
no allegations of forging any signatures or sworn any false affidavits of
impersonating anyone. The Applicant’s passport records immigration
stamp of departure from India dated 18.06.2024 and entry to Ireland on
19.06.2024. He returned to India on 29.11.2024. It is therefore evident that
the Applicant was outside India from 18.06.2024 to 29.11.2024. As such,
the Applicant cannot be held liable for preparing false affidavits pursuant
thereto.
6. Per contra, Mr. S. Karpe, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
vehemently opposed this application. Contending that grant of bail to
Page 3 of 5
25th August 2026
CRMAB-28-2026
Applicant would hamper ongoing investigation. Custodial interrogation
of the Applicant is essential to ascertain the identity of the person who
impersonated and appeared before the Notary as well as to effect recovery of
the forged documents allegedly prepared by Applicant.
7. On perusal of the document tendered into service it reveals that
contents of FIR itself demonstrates dispute between the family of Applicant’s
wife and her brothers. Applicant is brother-in-law of Accused No. 2. The
allegation against the Applicant is that he obtained certified copies
relating to previous mutations and used those documents in the mutation
application filed in the name of Applicant No. 1. From these allegations,
prima facie, no case for alleged offences can be made out against the
Applicant. The entire case is based on documentary evidence. Custodial
interrogation of the Applicant would not, in any manner, facilitate the effective
investigation. The presence of the Applicant can be secured for collecting
information without arrest. There are no criminal antecedents to discredit
Applicant. In that view of the matter, case is made out to grant pre-arrest bail.
Hence, following Order :
(a) In the event of arrest of Applicant in connection with C.R.
No.33 of 2026 registered with Fatorda Police Station, South Goa,
Margao, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two
solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Police
Inspector of concerned Police Station.
Page 4 of 5
25th August 2026
CRMAB-28-2026
(b) The Applicant shall attend concerned Police Station as and
when called till filing of chargesheet and shall cooperate with the
investigation.
(c) Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential
address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same
updated, in case of any change thereto.
(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing
the facts to the Court or any Police personnel.
(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence
and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness
in any manner.
(f) In case, the Applicant violates the terms and conditions of
bail, including the undertaking, it would be open to the
prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
8. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
Page 5 of 5
25th August 2026
Signed by: ANDREZA PEREIRA
Designation: Senior Private Secretary
to the Hon'ble Judge
Date: 27/08/2026 16:13:16
Checking your session…