Mumbai: PMLA Court Rejects Secondary Evidence Plea After Forgery Case Documents Go Missing

Mumbai: PMLA Court Rejects Secondary Evidence Plea After Forgery Case Documents Go Missing

A Mumbai PMLA court has rejected the prosecution’s plea to rely on secondary evidence in a forgery case involving the Sarva Dharma Manav Charitable Trust and an alleged ₹12 crore transfer. The original documents were found missing from the court record, although the handwriting expert’s report remained available.

Charul Shah JoshiUpdated: Sunday, October 11, 2026, 12:05 AM IST
Mumbai: PMLA Court Rejects Secondary Evidence Plea After Forgery Case Documents Go Missing
A Mumbai court has refused to allow secondary evidence in a trust-related forgery case after original documents referenced in a handwriting expert’s report were found missing | Representational Image

Mumbai, October 10, 2026: Nearly 20 years after a forgery case was registered against the trustees of the Sarva Dharma Manav Charitable Trust, documentary evidence has been found missing from the court record. The court has also rejected the prosecution's plea to rely on secondary evidence.

Case involves alleged Rs 12 crore fraud

In 2005-06, a case was originally registered at a police station in Thane. It was alleged that the accused had started a trust named Sarva Dharma Manav Charitable Trust and opened a current account at the State Bank of India's Wagle Estate branch. The prosecution alleged that, using forged documents, the accused managed to get funds to the tune of Rs 12 crore transferred into the trust's account.

Based on the case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) also lodged a money laundering case. Both cases were transferred to the special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court at the Mumbai Sessions Court.

Original documents found missing

Last month, when the court asked the prosecution to begin the trial, it was noticed that the original documents allegedly forged by the accused were missing. The court found that the handwriting report was on record, but the documents annexed to it were missing. Hence, the prosecution pleaded to rely on secondary evidence.

Also Watch:

Court rejects prosecution plea

The court rejected the plea, observing that, "There is nothing mentioned in the application, as who was in custody of the said documents, who has received the documents alongwith Handwriting Expert Report, and who thereafter took it into the custody after it was received from the Forensic Department alongwith the opinion of the Handwriting Expert. There is nothing on record alongwith the present application to know which documents the prosecution is intending to prove."

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/