Bombay High Court Flags 'Casual Probe' Into Alleged Fabrication Of Court Orders, Seeks Further Investigation

The Bombay High Court has observed that when there are allegations regarding the fabrication of orders of the High Court, the Court cannot remain a “mute spectator” to a casual or predetermined investigation. The Court observed that where prima facie material indicates fabrication of court orders, the investigating agency is expected to conduct a serious and fair investigation aimed at identifying the real culprit.Justice R.M. Joshi was hearing a bail application filed by an advocate accused in a case registered for offences under Sections 409, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 474 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations against the applicant were that he fabricated orders purportedly passed by the High Court and other authorities and supplied them to the informant, who was his client. According to the informant, orders dated 17 October 2022 and 12 December 2022 were later found to be fabricated documents. Similar allegations were made regarding other orders as well. The applicant contended that WhatsApp chats between him and the informant indicated that discussions regarding the pendency of proceedings continued even after the alleged fabricated orders had been supplied, thereby suggesting false implication. The Court noted that there was prima facie material to show that the orders in question were bogus documents. It observed that since the allegations pertained to the fabrication of orders of the High Court itself, the investigation ought to have been conducted with utmost seriousness to ascertain who had actually prepared the forged documents. However, upon a specific query from the Court, the investigating officer was unable to show any evidence collected during the investigation indicating who had fabricated the alleged bogus orders.The Court observed that the investigation appeared to have been carried out in “the most casual manner” and that there was reason to believe that the investigation was conducted in a predetermined direction rather than with the object of identifying the real culprit. The Court further noted that despite being aware of the WhatsApp chats relied upon by the applicant, and despite those documents forming part of the charge-sheet, the investigating officer failed to properly investigate that aspect. The Court held that an investigation into that material was necessary to ascertain whether the fabrication was by the applicant, for the informant, or by some other person. It observed: “… unnecessary interference in the investigation at the hands of the High Court is not expected. However, when there is apparent fact on record that orders of this Court are fabricated, this Court cannot remain as mute spectator of the irresponsible / casual investigation being carried out in this case.”Accordingly, the Court therefore directed the Senior Police Inspector of Azad Maidan Police Station to conduct further investigation, particularly regarding the WhatsApp records relied upon by the applicant, and to place a report of further investigation before the Court.Case Title: Vinaykumar Ashok Khatu v. State of Maharashtra [Criminal Bail Application No. 2659 of 2025]Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 250Click Here To Read/Download Order

Bombay High Court Flags 'Casual Probe' Into Alleged Fabrication Of Court Orders, Seeks Further Investigation

Saksham Vaishya

Tags