The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a plea filed by Samajwadi Party MLA Irfan Solanki, challenging Allahabad High Court order rejecting his bail plea in connection with a case of him allegedly boarding a flight on a forged Aadhaar card.
The order was passed by the bench of justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar. The bench declined to give relief to Solanki at this stage.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for Uttar Pradesh Government, opposed the Solanki’s plea.
Solanki, who was represented by R Basant and Advocate on Record Pallavi Sharma, challenged the Allahabad High Court order dated February 17, this year.
Allahabad High Court, however, dismissed Solanki’s bail application.
Solanki, in his plea, claimed that being a political figure from the minority community in Uttar Pradesh, he is at the receiving end of recurring malicious prosecutions and the present FIR is also borne out of political vendetta.
“It is respectfully submitted that 5 of such false FIRs against the Petitioner have culminated in favourable closure reports and in 4 of such FIRS the Petitioner is on bail and has not breached any condition thereof till date and in the remaining 5 FIRs of the year 2022, the investigation is yet not complete despite the expiry of significant time,” the petitioner said in his plea.
Solanki claimed that he had been framed in a false case where it has been alleged that he had forged the Aadhar Card of a co-accused and had used the same to travel from New Delhi to Mumbai via an Indigo Flight on November 11, 2022, in order to evade arrest in connection with another FIR against him.
Solanki claimed that there was no material to show that he forged the recovered Aadhar card, or, he was travelling on a forged Aadhar Card.
“Despite, the aforesaid position, the high court dismissed the prayer for bail on the ground that he, being a member of the Legislative Assembly, the petitioner forged an Aadhar Card and used the same for travelling to Mumbai,” the MLA stated in his plea.
He submitted further that the finding of the high court is a reiteration of the allegation in the FIR and the chargesheet.
“The same is also not final in nature and pre-mature as no conclusive guilt can be imputed on the Petitioner at the present stage where the trial is yet to commence,” the petitioner said, claiming that of the 9 accused named in the FIR, two were dropped as accused in the chargesheet and the remaining 6 co-accused were granted bail by the high court. (ANI)