Bombay High Court denies anticipatory bail to lawyer accused of misleading client with forged orders

The Bombay High Court on Monday denied anticipatory bail to practicing Advocate Vinaykumar Ashok Khatu, who faces serious allegations of fabricating High Court orders and misleading his elderly client in a property dispute. [Vinaykumar Ashok Khatu v. State of Maharashtra]

Justice RN Laddha, while denying the pre-arrest bail, emphasised the need for custodial interrogation, stating,

“The possibility of there being similarly circumstanced victims is eminent.”

The case involves allegations made by a 74-year-old informant, who claims that Khatu misrepresented legal outcomes related to her property in Alibaug. Specifically, she asserts that Khatu provided her with forged High Court orders dated October 17, 2022, and December 12, 2022.

She alleged that over time, he extracted a total of ₹2.57 crore from her under false pretenses, assuring her that her legal matters were being effectively handled. It was only upon consulting a new attorney that she learned that the orders presented to her were fraudulent and that her cases had never been listed for hearing.

Khatu's counsel argued that WhatsApp communications between Khatu and his client never explicitly mentioned High Court orders, pointing out that the relevant stay order was actually issued by the sub-divisional officer of Alibaug. In fact, she said that the informant herself fabricated the High Court orders in question.

She further contended that the ₹65 lakh he received from the client was legitimate, linked to a land deal and various other expenses related to the informant’s legal and financial matters, including payments for sales tax and customs duties.

It was argued that Khatu managed other civil and criminal matters for the informant as well and had agreed on a fee of ₹8 lakh. She emphasised that Khatu had been granted a general power of attorney by the informant, underscoring the level of trust she placed in him, and further contradicting the allegations against him.

Conversely, the Additional Public Prosecutor argued that Khatu had received ₹2.57 crore under false pretenses, directing these funds to various accounts while claiming to secure favourable orders for the informant.

He cited WhatsApp communications that allegedly revealed Khatu's involvement in fabricating the court documents, further asserting that witness statements indicated that he delivered these forged orders, misleading the informant about the status of her appeals.

Counsel for the informant highlighted Khatu's previous criminal antecedents, including arrests for impersonating an IAS officer and falsely claiming to be the Deputy Director of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), for which he was arrested by the Delhi Police in 2016.

The Court concluded that the allegations constituted a significant breach of trust and underscored the need for further investigation.

“Forging the Court’s order is a severe violation that undermines public trust in the legal system. Moreover, the applicant has criminal antecedents, and the investigation is at a nascent stage."

Stating that the release of Khatu on pre-arrest bail would impede the course of effective investigation, the Court rejected his application.

Advocate Pushpa Ganediwala, along with Advocates Amar Gharte and Taiyaba Kazi appeared for Khatu.

Additional Public Prosecutor Yogesh Dabke appeared for the State.

Advocate Rizwan Merchant, along with Advocates Sanjana Pardeshi, Ramiz Shaikh and Harshil Gandhi on behalf of Rizwan Merchant & Associates, appeared for the informant.

[Read Order]