Akil Kureshi, J.

1. During the course of hearing of the appeal, certain disturbing aspects came to light of the Court. These were recorded in an order dated 30th April 2008 in following terms:

1. Appellant is the original accused who was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 363 366 376 and 506(2) of IPC by learned Sessions Judge, Patan by a judgment dated 29th March, 2007 passed in Sessions Case No. 50 of 2006.

2. The appellant-convict filed Misc. Criminal Application No. 1539 of 2008 seeking temporary bail on the ground that the appellant-convict and the victim girl were in love with each other since childhood. They were neighbors and that now, the victim girl is ready to marry the applicant. It was also stated in the application that the father of the victim girl is also ready for such marriage. On the ground that the applicant who wanted to marry the victim girl, temporary bail was sought. Along with application at Annexure-A the affidavit purported to have been filed by Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir, father of the victim girl was filed. In the affidavit, it is stated inter-alia that the victim girl i.e. daughter of the deponent and the applicant know each other since childhood. They are childhood friends and thus they had fallen in love with each other. On account of these reasons and upon persuasion of the other members of the community, the deponent is agreeable to marriage between the victim girl and the applicant. On this basis, this Court had granted temporary bail to the convict for a period of 2 weeks by an order dated 28.2.2008.

3. Subsequently, in the Criminal Appeal filed on behalf of the convict, learned advocate had shown to the Court two affidavits both dated 16.4.2008 purportedly sworn by victim girl and her father, Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir. In the affidavit, the victim girl is supposed to have stated that she and the convict are childhood friends and they have been in love and they have got married on 12th March, 2008. In his affidavit, father of the victim girl stated similarly that his daughter and the convict are childhood friends and they were in love with each other and with his consent, the two have got married on 12th March, 2008. The said affidavits in original tendered by learned advocate Ms. Kapadia are taken on record.

4. Having some doubt about the contents of the affidavit, I had requested learned APP Ms.Punani to have the same verified through police agency. Simultaneously, I had also requested the learned advocate for the applicant Ms.Rekha Kapadia to ensure that the deponents remain present before the Court on 24th April, 2008.

5. Accordingly, on 24th April, 2008 learned APP Ms.Punani tendered a communication dated 23rd April, 2008 from the DSP, Patan to the Office of the Government Pleader along with statements of victim girl R and her father Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir, recorded by the Police Officer on 22nd April, 2008. In their statements, the daughter and the father clearly stated that the girl has not married the convict, that they have not filed any affidavit to this effect and they had not sworn the affidavits dated 16.4.2008.

5.1 As directed by this Court, on behalf of the convict, the young victim girl and a middle aged gentleman remained present on 24th April, 2008 posing themselves to be victim girl R and her father Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir. They vouched for the statements made in the affidavits and conveyed to the Court that they had filed such affidavits. In view of this discrepancy, I requested learned APP Ms.Punani to summon the Police Officer who had recorded the statements dated 22nd April, 2008 along with the persons whose statements he had recorded. I also requested the learned advocate for the applicant to ensure that the young girl and the elderly gentleman present before the Court posing to be victim girl R and her father Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir also remain present on the next date of hearing. The matter was adjourned to 29th April, 2008.

6. On 29th April, 2008, the Police Officer remained present with young girl and elderly gentleman who stated before the Court that they are victim girl R and her father Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir respectively. They agreed that their statements were recorded by Police Officer on 22nd April, 2008. They stated that the victim girl has not married the accused that there was no previous love affair and they have not sworn the affidavits dated 16.4.2008. The young girl and the elderly gentleman who were present before the Court on 24th April, 2008, however, did not turn up on 29th April, 2008. Learned advocate Ms.Kapadia under instructions stated that they were not present due to some misunderstanding. She conveyed to the Court that they would remain present on the next date. For this purpose, therefore, the appeal was kept today for further consideration.

7. Today, when the matter was called out it was found that Police Officer along with victim girl R and her father Shri Abdulsha Mohmmadsha Fakir were present. Young girl and middle aged gentleman who were present before the Court on 24.4.2008 once again did not turn up before the Court. Apparently, they have dis-appeared.

8. It thus emerges that prima-facie, an attempt was made to file false affidavits before the Court contending that the convict and the victim girl were in love from the beginning and they have got married. To enable the convict to get married, the temporary bail application was moved and granted by the Court on the basis of affidavit purported to have been filed by the father of the victim girl. In the appeal also to ensure lighter punishment, two affidavits purported to have been filed by her and the father were presented. Prima-facie, it appears that such affidavits were not actually sworn by the victim girl and her father. Before the Court two impostors prima-facie were produced posing to be victim girl and her father. These people though were directed to remain present on 29th April, 2008 and on 30th April, 2008 failed to appear.

9. The attempt made on behalf of the convict to mislead the Court by filing false affidavits by making false averments in the false affidavits and by presenting impostors to pose as victim girl and her father is serious. The matter needs to be dealt with firmly in accordance with law. To consider what action is called for, with the assistance of learned advocates appearing for the parties, S.O. to 1st May, 2008.

10. Learned APP to tender the original statements dated 22nd April, 2008 of the victim girl as well as her father on record on 1st May, 2008.

Prima facie, therefore, it would appear that an attempt was made to produce false affidavits purported to have been filed by the victim girl and her father and the same were also presented before the Court to pass-off as the victim girl and her father. I am, therefore, of the opinion that it is in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made into the filing and presentation of such affidavits before this Court and also with respect to presentation of persons prima facie found to be impostors of the victim girl and her father. In terms of the provisions contained in Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, before taking further steps to initiate prosecution against the persons responsible for such actions, as required under Section (1) of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it would appropriate that a report is called for from the police.

2. For the above purpose, DSP, Patan is requested to appoint a Police Officer not below the rank of PI of the concerned police station to inquire into the genuineness or otherwise of the two affidavits both dated 16th April 2008 purported to have been sworn by one Rizwana Abdulshah Mohmmadsha Fakir and Abdulshah Mohmmadsha Fakir as well as the genuineness or otherwise of the affidavit dated 25th July 2007 purported to have been filed by Abdulshah Mohmmadsha Fakir which was produced by the convict Akbarbhai Rasulbhai Arodia Muman at Annexure A to Criminal Misc. Application No. 1539 of 2008. If found that such affidavits were not sworn by the said persons, it will also be inquired as to who sworn such affidavit and at whose instance. The Police Officer shall also inquire into who and what manner identified such persons before the Notary Public.

Simultaneously the identity of the young girl and the middle aged person who presented before this Court on 24th April 2008 as Rizwana and her father Abdulshah be tried to be ascertained and inquired at whose instance they had come before the Court.

3. Report in this regard shall be made on 17th June 2008. Along with this order which may be supplied to the learned APP for its communication and compliance, the Registry shall also supply copies of the said three affidavits.

4. What further steps are required to be taken in the present proceedings shall be decided once the report is received.