The Bombay High Court has denied bail to four individuals accused of forging a judge’s signature and presenting a fake judicial order as authentic. The court stated that such actions undermine the credibility of the judicial system itself. Justice Amit Borkar, in rejecting the bail petitions, emphasized that the offenses committed were not ordinary, as forging a judicial order and misusing the court’s seal directly impact the trust in the judicial institution.
The judge highlighted the seriousness of the case, noting that the involvement of court personnel, lawyers, and private individuals in forging judicial records raises significant concerns about institutional integrity. The incident came to light when Advocate Mahesh Deshmukh raised concerns about a certified copy application at the Civil Judge’s Court in Panvel, Navi Mumbai. Subsequent investigations revealed the forgery of signatures and creation of fake documents within the Court’s Case Information System between November 2023 and October 2024, leading to the filing of an FIR against unknown perpetrators.
Additional Public Prosecutor Rajashree V. Newton opposed the bail applications, providing details of each accused’s alleged involvement. It was revealed that Deepak Fad, a junior clerk in the Panvel court’s Computer Section, used another clerk’s user ID to manipulate records and create forged documents. Accused Gauri Kelkar was accused of forging Judge Bidkar’s signature on multiple occasions, collaborating closely with advocates Amar Patwardhan and Yogesh Kelkar.
Newton argued against Patwardhan’s bail plea, stating his financial dealings with a property agent to secure a fraudulent heirship certificate. The court also highlighted efforts by accused Sunil Upadhyay to offer additional payments for obtaining fake certificates. The bench stressed the importance of preserving the integrity of court records, underlining that any attempt to alter or fabricate official data constitutes a serious offense under the law.
The court concluded that the forgery of judicial documents, especially those bearing a judge’s signature, represents a significant breach of trust and undermines the justice system’s core principles. Justice Borkar emphasized that such deceitful actions disrupt the entire justice system built on authenticity and reliance on official records. The bench emphasized the critical role of judicial integrity, stating that courts must maintain public confidence by issuing genuine and accurate documents. Misusing access to tamper with records not only challenges the judicial system’s foundation but also subverts the authority of the law.