Bombay High Court
MUDASSIR AHMED MOHAMMED HAROONversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the prima facie evidence of forged documents, financial transactions, and collusion among the accused justified the denial of anticipatory bail under the inherent powers of the High Court.
Summary
The High Court considered multiple anticipatory bail applications filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by teachers and school officials accused of forging appointment orders to back‑date their service dates and evade the mandatory Teacher Eligibility Test. The prosecution alleged that the accused fabricated approval letters dated 9 March 2015 to show appointments as of 1 December 2012 instead of the actual date of 17 June 2013, thereby obtaining higher salaries and avoiding the TET requirement. Evidence cited included statements under Section 183 of the BNSS, CCTV footage, call records, and discrepancies in the UDISE+ database, all indicating a concerted scheme involving the school management and an agent who collected large sums of money. The defence argued lack of direct involvement, the seniority of one accused, and the reliance on a ten‑year‑old memory of a retired officer. After evaluating the material, the Court held that the prima facie case established the participation of all accused in the falsification and fraud, justifying denial of bail. Consequently, the anticipatory bail applications and the related interim applications were dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations of forged appointment orders and back‑dating constitute offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 337, 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 BNSS to deny anticipatory bail in the present circumstances.
- Whether the evidence presented establishes a prima facie case against each accused, justifying the refusal of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318(4), 336(3), 337, 340(2), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 169, 183
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- fabricated documents
- Teacher Eligibility Test
- education department corruption
- Section 482 BNSS
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita offences
- fraud
Judgment
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2410 OF 2025
Naveed Aktar Sagheer Ahmed …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3539 OF 2025
IN
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2410 OF 2025
Mudassir Ahmed Mohammed Haroon …Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Naveed Aktar Sagheer Ahmed …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
WITH
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2434 OF 2025
Shafeeque Ahmad Jameel Hasan & Ors …Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3538 OF 2025
IN
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2434 OF 2025
Mudassir Ahmed Mohammed Haroon …Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Shafeeque Ahmad Jameel Hasan & Ors …Applicants
Page 1
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Ashok Mundargi i/b. Mr. Varun Thokal, for the Applicants.
Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b. Ms. Keral Mehta, for the Applicant in
ABA/2410/2025.
Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Sanjeev B. Deore a/w. Mr. Aman Ansari and Mr. Aditya S.
Deore i/b. Ms. Suchita J. Pawar, for the Intervenor.
Mr. Ganesh Wagh, API and Mr. Masule, Head Constable, attached
to Pawarwadi Police Station, Nashik Rural, Nashik, present.
Mr. Pawar, Police Constable attached to Economic Offences Wing,
Nashik Rural, Nashik, present.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 29th AUGUST 2026
PC:-
1. Heard Mr. Ashok Mundargi, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application
No.2434 of 2025, Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, learned Counsel
appearing for the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application
No.2410 of 2025, Mr. Deore, learned Counsel appearing for the
Intervenors and Mrs. Deshmukh, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.
2. These applications are filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”)seeking pre-
Page 2
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.95 of 2025 registered with
Azad Nagar Police Station, Nashik Rural, Nashik, for the offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 337, 340(2) and 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).
3. Mr. Ashok Mundargi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the Applicants in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2434 of 2025
i.e. for Accused Nos.1 to 4 submitted that the First Informant has
certain grievance regarding his seniority as teacher in Student
Welfare and Education Society, Malegaon (“Swes School”) and
therefore, filed an FIR. However, he submitted that the seniority
lists from the year 2013-2014 to 2022-2023 were periodically
signed by the First Informant, where the teachers against whom it
is alleged by the First Informant that they were appointed after
him, were shown as seniors to him. He further submitted that the
main allegation is based on an approval granted by the Education
Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik. He submitted that the
contention of the Applicants is that the approval dated 9 th March
2015, wherein the date of appointment of the 13 teachers is shown
as 1st December 2012 (Page 66 of the Anticipatory Bail
Application) is a forged and fabricated approval order and that a
Page 3
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
bogus order was prepared in place of the genuine order dated 9 th
March 2015 (Page 33 of the Interim Application) and for the
purpose of raising said contention, the only reliance is placed on
the statement dated 15th September 2025 of Mr. Navnath Avtade,
who is a retired Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad,
Nashik (Page 294 to 295 of the Affidavit-in-Reply), wherein he has
stated that he remembered that, he has signed the approval letter,
where the appointment dates of the year 2013 were shown.
Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the said statement was
made purely from the memory of the witness and was recorded
after a lapse of 10 years i.e. on 15 th September 2025. Learned
Senior Counsel has also relied on a letter dated 2 nd January 2020
issued by Swes High School, which states that the date of
appointment is incorrectly mentioned as 17 th June 2013 in the
information made available online (Page 221 to 224). Learned
Senior Counsel also relied on the letter dated 9 th March 2015
addressed by the school forwarding proposal for approval of 17
Assistant Teachers (Page 64 to 65). He submitted that the said
proposal clearly records the appointment date as 1 st December
2012.
Page 4
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
4. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that Applicant No.1 is
Joint Secretary, Applicant No.2 is the Chairman of School
Committee and the Secretary of the Trust and Applicant No.4 is a
Senior Clerk. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the
Applicants have no role to play and false allegations are made
against the Applicants, as the First Informant wanted that he be
shown as senior than other teachers. Learned Senior Counsel
submitted that as far as the Applicant No.2 is concerned, he is a
senior citizen of 86 years old. Learned Senior Counsel submitted
that as the allegations are totally false and as there is no material
showing that the Applicant is involved in the crime, the
Anticipatory Bail Application be allowed.
5. Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant (Accused No.5) in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2410
of 2025, submitted that he is not at all concerned with the said
school. He has pointed out the report filed by the State before the
learned Sessions Court opposing his Anticipatory Bail Application
and submitted that on the basis of the statements of some
witnesses, he has tried to be roped in. He submitted that the
Applicant is not at all concerned with the school and he is working
Page 5
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
as teacher in Mahanagar School No.23, Urdu Primary School,
Malegaon. He submitted that although it is stated that there are
antecedents against the Applicant, as far as one antecedent is
concerned ‘C Summary’ report has been filed, as far as another
antecedent is concerned, report under Section 169 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”) is filed and in the third
antecedent, the Applicant has been granted anticipatory bail and in
the fourth antecedent, the Anticipatory Bail Application is pending
and which is listed before this Court today. He submitted that the
Applicant’s brother was appointed in a school, which is the subject
matter in C.R. No.181 of 2025 and said brother has been arrested
and therefore, the Applicant has been made accused in this case by
alleging that the Applicant is working as Agent as amount of about
Rs.45,00,000/- was transferred by his brother in his account.
However, he submitted that the Applicant is not involved in the
crime.
6. Mrs. Deshmukh, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-
State submitted that as the Teacher Eligibility Test (“TET”) is made
compulsory by the Government Resolution dated 30 th June 2016
w.e.f. 13th February 2013, the documents were fabricated by the
Page 6
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
accused by showing that the concerned teachers were appointed
w.e.f. 1st December 2012. Learned APP submitted that therefore,
the original order dated 9th March 2015 showing the date of
concerned teachers as appointed on 17th June 2013 was changed
to 1st December 2012 by fabricating the order. She submitted that
the Applicant No.2 who is Chairman of the School Committee and
Secretary of the Trust has created bogus appointment orders
showing that the concerned teachers have been appointed on 1 st
December 2012 instead of on 17 th June 2013. She submitted that
even the false record of joining report dated 1 st December 2012
was created and the same was signed by the Chairman i.e. present
Applicant No.2 and the Headmaster i.e. Applicant No.3. She
submitted that the fabricated order dated 9th March 2015
purportedly issued by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla
Parishad, Nashik, has been acknowledged as received by the
Headmaster i.e. Applicant No.3 to make show that the said
fabricated order has been issued on 9th March 2015. She submitted
that the Anticipatory Bail Application is required to be rejected as
the record of the case is not to be found, as the Applicants are
destroying the available record from the office of the Education
Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik and the original papers
Page 7
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
are not traceable. She has pointed out the statements of victims
recorded under Section 183 of the CrPC, wherein specific role of
the Applicants is disclosed. She has also pointed out the statements
of certain witnesses to show that the Applicants are involved in the
crime. She has pointed out the statement of the Administrative
Officer, Education Department, Municipal Corporation of Malegaon
and the data available on Unified District Information System for
Education Plus (“UDISE+iz.kkyh”). She also pointed out the data
available on “Teachers Profile Data” available from the academic
year 2018-2019 on the said app namely UDISE+iz.kkyh. She
submitted that the letter dated 2 nd January 2020 (Page 221) and
7th July 2020 (Page 225) allegedly issued by the school has not
been received by the Administrative Officer, Municipal Council
Education Board, Malegaon. She has pointed out the statements of
various witnesses recorded to show that the accused No.5, who has
acted as Agent has accepted money from several witnesses for the
purpose of obtaining approval of their appointments. For the said
purpose, she relied on the panchnama of CCTV footage conducted
on 27th September 2025 (Page 72). She submitted that one of the
teacher was working in Malegaon High School and Junior College
and for the same period for which shown to be working in the
Page 8
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
concerned school. She also pointed out the CDR record showing
that the accused No.5 is in contact with accused No.4, who is the
Senior Clerk and for the period between 2023 to 2025, there were
total 888 calls made between both of them. She also pointed out
that other co-accused also were in contact with the Accused No.5
and there are several conversations between them on cellphone.
She, therefore, submitted that this is not a case where the
Applicants be granted anticipatory bail.
7. Before considering the rival contention, it is necessary to set
out the prosecution case. The prosecution case is set out in
paragraph No.4 of the affidavit dated 13th September 2025 filed by
Mr. Yashwantrao Shinde, Assistant Police Inspector, Economic
Offence Wing, Nashik Rural, Dist. Nashik, which reads as under:
“4. I say that the prosecution case in brief is as
under:-
(a) It is the case of the Orig.
Complainant/Informant that Muddasir Ahmad Moh.
Harun is a Post of P.E. in the Student Welfare
Education society High school, Usmanabad. The
said school is run by Student Welfare Education
Society Trust.
(b) It is the case of the informant that on
23/11/2012 there was advertisement in the local
news paper for the post of 11 teachers non grant in
Page 9
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
the SWES High School. In Sr. No. 1 the qualification
SSC/HSC/D.Ed for the of 8 post for sub teachers
non grant, medium Urdu. In Sr. No. 2 the
qualification B.A./B.Sc., B.Ed for the post of 3 for
sub teachers grant, medium Urdu.
(c) It is the case of the informant that in the same
school one P.T. teacher Adbul Ajij retired on
31/05/2023 the complainant made request to the
management to appoint the complainant. The
management rejected the request of the
complainant. In September 2023, the
institution/school advertised the recruitment of
Physical Education Teachers (for women) and 6
other teachers as education servants. At that time,
the informant also gave an interview on
27.08.2023. But the institution selected a female
candidate Najma for the said post. Informant was
given 20% salary from November 2023.(d) It is the
case of the informant that in complainant is
working from 2014 (ii) Fifteen teachers were
working from 2013 and (iii) Syed Akhtar Syed
Farooq was working from 2015. They all teachers
took 20% aided salary from June 2023 to May
2024. On 30/08/2024, the Principal of Swes High
School submitted a proposal to the Education
Officer Secondary, Zilla Parishad, Nashik, for
approval of transfer of 2 teachers from partially
aided (60%) for fully aided class. On the same day
the Education Officer (Secondary) prepared an
order bearing No. 4205 approving the transfer of 2
teachers from partially aided (60%) to aided posts
without taking permission from the Government.
(e) It is the case of the informant that on
30.08.2024, the Head Master of Swes High School
submitted a proposal to the Education Officer
(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik for approval of
transfer of 8 teachers from partially aided (20%) to
fully aided class. On 02.09.2024, the Education
Officer, Secondary, Zilla Parishad Nashik prepared
Page 10
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
an order No. 4831/24 approving the transfer of 8
teachers from partially aided to fully aided class.
(f) It is the case of the informant that on
26.09.2024, the Head Master of Swes High School
submitted a proposal to the Education Officer
Secondary, Zilla Parishad, Nashik regarding the
approval of transfer of 9 teachers from partially
aided to fully aided class. The Education Officer,
Secondary, Zilla Parishad Nashik, by mentioning the
same previous order's outward number 4205 issued
approval order dt. 27.09.2024 of transfer of 9
teachers from partially aided (20%) to aided posts.
(g) It is the case of the informant that as per report
of investigation officer, during investigation it
revealed that there are forged approval orders
whose outward number and date are same. As per
original order dt. 17.06.2013, there is approval of
16 Assistant Teachers out of 17 Assistant Teachers.
However, in the forged approval order, the
appointment date of 11 assistant teachers was
changed to 01.12.2012. Accused have shown bogus
appointment order from 01.12.2012 of 8 assistant
teachers out of 11 assistant teachers in order to not
made them applicable Teacher Eligibility Test. Out
of them, assistant teacher Syed Akhtar Farooq was
at Malegaon High School and Junior College,
Malegaon, Dist. Nashik on a voluntary basis,
drawing government honorarium. The said assistant
teacher was serving in Swes High School during the
academic year 2015-2016 and the informant has
been working in the same school since June 2014.
Due to the bogus and fake appointment date of
Syed Akhtar Syed Farooq on the basis of a fake
approval order, a higher pay scale was applied to
him than the informant.
h) On the basis of the complaint, offence vide CR
No.95/2025 u/secs. 318(4), 336(3), 337, 340(2),
3(5) of BNS registered with Azadnagar Police
Station, Nashik Rural, Dist.: Nashik on 09.07.2025
Page 11
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
against (1) Shafik Ahmed Jamil Hasan 2) Abdul
Rahim Abdul Khalik 3) Nafeej Ishrat Mirza Amin 4)
Usman Gani Gulam Rabbani 5) Naveed Akhtar
Sagir Ahmed on 09.07.2025 and investigation was
commenced.”
8. Although, the FIR proceeds on the basis that the First
Informant is senior than other teachers and inspite of that, he has
been shown as junior, in fact, during the investigation it was
revealed that the fabricated proposal and fabricated approval given
by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik, was
prepared so that these teachers are not required to appear for the
Teachers Eligibility Test, which has been made mandatory from
13th February 2013.
9. Thus, the purpose of the crime was not only to show these
teachers as senior but to see that they are not required to give the
TET, which is made mandatory w.e.f. 13th February 2013.
10. As per the approval letter dated 9 th March 2015 (page 33 of
the Interim Application), the date of appointment is 17 th June
2013, whereas approval letter dated 9 th March 2015 (Page 66 of
the Anticipatory Bail Application) on which Mr. Mundargi, learned
Page 12
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
Senior Counsel has heavily relied, mentions the date of
appointment of these teachers as 1 st December 2012. According to
the prosecution, approval letter dated 9th March 2015 (Page 66 of
the Anticipatory Bail Application) wherein, the appointment date is
mentioned as 1st December 2012 is fabricated letter.
11. Perusal of the record shows that since 2010 the State
Government has made mandatory that school should give the
information in the UDISE+ iz.kkyh. The statement of Mr.
Chandrakant Daulat Patil, the Administrative Officer, Education
Department of Malegaon Municipal Corporation, specifically states
that from the year 2010, it was necessary for all schools of
Malegaon to inform to the Education Department of the Malegaon
Municipal Corporation, the information of all the teachers as per
the UDISE+iz.kkyh and the said work from the academic year 2009-
2010 onwards was done offline and from the academic year 2018-
2019 the same is to be done by online method. The teachers profile
data made available by the school from the academic year 2018-
2019 is available with the Education Department of Malegaon
Municipal Corporation and the said information as provided by the
Page 13
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
said school shows that these teachers have been appointed on 17 th
June 2013 and not on 1st December 2012.
12. Mr. Ashok Mundargi, learned Senior Counsel has more
particularly, relied on the letter dated 2 nd January 2020 (Page 221
of the Anticipatory Bail Application) of Swes High School, wherein
the said school has informed the Administrative Officer of the
Municipal School Board, Malegaon that although on the online
method the date of appointment of these teachers is wrongly
mentioned as 17th June 2013, the actual appointment date is 1 st
December 2012. As per the prosecution case, the said letter was
never submitted.
13. In any case, it is relevant to note that during investigation
there are statements recorded of some of the teachers stating that
they were appointed in the year 2013 and huge amounts were
accepted from them from time to time for their appointment and
thereafter for getting approval. Even the statement of one witness
has been recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Malegaon under Section 183 of the BNSS, wherein the said witness
has given the details of the payment made to various persons
Page 14
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
including some of the Applicants. There are statements recorded of
many witnesses, wherein it is stated that for getting the approval,
huge amounts were accepted by accused No.5. There is CCTV
footage of 15th May 2023 of which panchnama is drawn, wherein it
is seen that accused No.5 met the Deputy Director of the Education
while bringing one file and on that file, the Deputy Director of
Education has put his signature.
14. Thus, the offence is very serious, where the object of the
crime is not only to falsely claim seniority over the First Informant,
but also to defraud the Government by backdating their
appointments to claim unauthorized salaries and more
significantly, the same was done to ensure that these teachers get
approvals without requiring them to pass the mandatory Teachers
Eligibility Test, despite being appointed after the cutoff date of 13 th
February 2013. Prima facie, it is clear that these teachers were
appointed on 17th June 2013 and by fabricating the record, it is
shown that they have been appointed on 1 st December 2012. Thus,
this is a very serious case.
Page 15
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
15. Although, it is the contention of learned Senior Counsel that
the accused No.2, who is the Chairman is 86 years old, however,
the record shows that he is in contact with the accused No.5, who
has acted as Agent between these teachers and the management
and accepted huge amounts from time to time from different
teachers by stating that the amounts are required to be given to the
management and also to higer officials of the Education
Department. The Accused Nos.1 and 2 are part of the
management, the Accused No.3 is the Headmaster and Accused
No.4 is the Senior Clerk, whose duty is to maintain the record.
Accused No.5 has acted as Agent and accepted huge amounts.
Prima facie, all these persons are involved in commission of crime
by fabricating the documents.
16. Accordingly, prima facie all these persons are involved in
very serious crime.
17. Mr. Deore, learned Counsel appearing for the First Informant
has submitted that after lodging the FIR, various notices have been
issued to the First Informant, who is working as teacher in the said
school and enquiry has been conducted against him and he is
Page 16
Sonali
1-ABA-2322-2025.DOC
being pressurized to withdraw the complaint. Thus, it is a very
clear that the Applicants are pressurizing the witnesses and
tampering with the evidence. Even the original record is not
traceable.
18. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, no case is made out for
grant of anticipatory bail.
19. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Applications are dismissed.
20. In view of the dismissal of the Anticipatory Bail Applications,
the Interim Applications are also disposed of.
21. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
prima facie and made only for the purpose of consideration of
these Anticipatory Bail Applications.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Digitally
signed by
SONALI
SONALI MILIND
MILIND PATIL
PATIL Date:
2026.08.31
16:00:05
+0530
Page 17
Sonali
Checking your session…