1
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
MHCC020048372022
BEFORE THE DESIGNATED COURT UNDER THE M.P.I.D. ACT
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURT, MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 863 OF 2022
(CNR No. MHCC020048372022)
IN
CR no.9 OF 2022
Jay Vasantlal Gajjar
Aged about 46 years, adult, Indian Inhabitant,
having address at 301, Yog Milan,
5 Forjett Hill Road, Tardeo, Mumbai36.
]
]
]
]
Applicant/Org.
Accused
Versus
The State of Maharashtra.
(Through EOW, Unit VII)
]
]… Respondent
Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Girish Kulkarni for Applicant.
Ld. SPP Mrs. Tendulkar for the State/ Respondent.
Ld. Advocate Akhtar along with Ld. Advocate Kshitija Wadatkar for
intervenor.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI C. V. MARATHE
(Court Room no. 7)
DATED : 29th April, 2022.
ORAL ORDER
1.
This is an application for bail filed by the applicant/
accused Jay Vasantlal Gajjar under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “Cr.P.C.) in connection with the CR No.9
of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 420,
2
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
477(a), 120B r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter “IPC”).
2.
The applicant’s contentions are as under :
The applicant is innocent and he has not committed any
offence. He attended the Police Station for preliminary inquiry from
January 2022 and visited the same even after lodging of F.I.R.
whenever he was called by police. The Investigating Officer has
conducted panchanama of his premises on 01.03.2022 and seized all
the necessary documents. The passport of the applicant is returned to
him.
The applicant was in police custody from 23.03.2022 to
04.04.2022. Thereafter, he is in judicial custody for more than 25 days.
The allegations against the applicant are vague and cryptic. The
informant had signed demat slips many years back and after several
years he can not allege that they were induced to sign the demat slips.
They have not specified the nature of inducement or misrepresentation.
The allegations of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of
amounts by cheating are mutually exclusive of each other. The accounts
of the Company of the informant are subject to audits and other
mandatory checks and it is unimaginable that for a long period of 10
years, the transactions of the applicant went unnoticed. The informant
has not given any details of so called fraud of Rs.18 Crores. There is no
question of misuse of electronic signatures or falsifying accounts. The
applicant has always cooperated the investigating machinery. All the
transactions in the demat accounts, margin accounts and pool accounts
are recorded by institutions like National Stock Exchange (NSE) and
Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the records can be easily secured by
Investigating Agency from the said institutions. Therefore, the
3
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
applicant’s presence in custody is not necessary and he be released on
bail.
3.
The
Investigating
Officer
has
filed
reply
(Exh.02)
contending inter alia as under :
The applicant has committed very serious economic
offences of money fraud. The investigation of offences is not yet
completed. The applicant will dispose off his properties if released on
bail. The associates of the applicant are not yet arrested. The applicant
will hamper the investigation if released on bail. He will try to
pressurize prosecution witnesses. The applicant will leave the country
and will not face the trail. Therefore, the application be rejected.
4.
The first informant has filed written submissions (Exh.4)
and contended as under :
The applicant is master mind of the crime, he continued his
illegal acts for more than 15 years and committed fraud of
approximately Rs.21 Crores or more. Considering his modus operandi,
he is not entitled for the relief of bail. The intervenor has relied upon
Judgment in Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation (Criminal Appeal No. 730 of 2013 arising out of S.L.P.
(Cri.) No.3404 of 2013) to submit that the economic offences are
having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds
and therefore, they need to be viewed seriously.
5.
Perusal of the F.I.R. would show that the applicant was
appointed as a dealer in the year 1995 in Jas One Securities Pvt. Ltd.
(hereinafter “the Company”) wherein the informant and his family
members were Directors. The Company was engaged in the business of
4
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
dealing in equity (cash) market and was member of National Stock
Exchange of India. The Company had own Prop. Account, Margin
Account, Beneficiary Account, Pool Account. The allegations in the
F.I.R. disclose that the applicant induced the informant and his family
members to keep their shares in margin account on the pretext of
mandatory regulations, then he used to transfer the said shares to the
beneficiary account without their consent or intimation.
The F.I.R. further alleges that apart from handling margin
account and beneficiary account, the applicant had duty to manage the
clients and accounts of the other Company Janam Group’s trades,
Demat work, banking, accounts, emailing contract notes and payin and
payout of shares and money coordinating with NSE and etc. on day to
day basis. The applicant sold off all the shares of Janam Group
Company, which were transferred on the inducement of the applicant
under the pretext of “Margin Account” to the accounts opened by the
applicant in his name and other persons. His associates Dyneshwar
Gorivale and Amit Parab assisted him in his misdeeds. In January 2021,
it was found that the shares were transferred in the names of Rajesh
Shah, Hardik Shah and Sulabha Shah without knowledge of the
informant and there was debit balance of Rs.3,71,763/ (Rupees Three
Lakh Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Three only). The
applicant committed forgery by affixing digital signature on demat
instruction slips without their authority or consent. By doing this, he
sold the shares of informant and his family to the account of the
applicant and his family members. By disposing off the said shares, the
applicant deprived the informant and his family members of all the
corporate benefits such as splits and bonus upon their shares.
5
6.
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
In the written notes of arguments (Exh.4), it is contended
that the applicant used to create Journal Vouchers (JV) entries on the
last day of financial year to hide manipulated amount under the name
of receivables from the NSE because of that when auditor used to audit
it appeared that the amount was receivables from NSE whereas the
amounts were already transferred in the 18 beneficiaries accounts of the
applicant.
7.
From the lodgment of the F.I.R., the Investigating Officer
had called the applicant for preliminary inquiry. It is case of the
applicant that he visited the police station every time when he was
called and gave his explanation. After perusal of the reply (Exh.2), the
Investigating Officer has not disclosed whether any amount from the
misappropriated money was recovered from the applicant. The details
given in the F.I.R. disclose that the case is based on documents which
can be made available by the Investigating Agency from institutions like
NSE or BSE. The role of the applicant in committing criminal breach of
trust can be investigated by collecting the demat slips, transactions
details, bank accounts or contract notes which are available with the
concern institutions/ authorities.
8.
From the contents of the F.I.R, it can be seen that the
applicant was working in the Company since 1995 i.e. for more than 27
years. The alleged misdeeds started from the year 2012/13. The story
narrated by the informant suggests that they used to rely on the
applicant blindly for so many years and their shares were transferred
without their consent but by following the procedure for such transfers.
Investigating Agency will have to collect multiple documents, in order
to establish the offences against the applicant and other suspects, of last
6
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
many years and the investigation will take long time. It is not allegation
of the informant that flight risk is associated with the applicant. The
story of the informant suggests that the applicant worked with the
informant for 25 years. There are no criminal antecedents of the
applicant. All the offences are triable by Metropolitan Magistrate.
Meticulous examination of the evidence produced by the informant or
collected by the police need not be undertaken at this stage of
investigation. Considering all the above said aspects, the applicant is
entitled for the relief. Hence, order :
ORDER
1. Bail Application No. 863 of 2022 is allowed and disposed of.
2. The applicant/accused Jay V. Gajjar is hereby released on bail in
CR no. 9/22 of EOW (Unit VII) Mumbai on furnishing PR bond of
Rs.1,00,000/ (Rs. One lakh) and one or more sureties in the like
amount.
3. The applicant shall surrender his passport before the investigating
officer within a period of one week of his release.
4. The applicant shall attend EOW (Unit VII) Mumbai every Monday
between 10.00 AM to 11.00 AM till further order.
5. The applicant shall cooperate with the investigating authority
and shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses.
6. The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission
of this Court.
7. The applicant shall inform the fact of change of his residential
address in future to the trial court.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKHAR
CHANDRASHEKHAR VIJAYKUMAR
VIJAYKUMAR
MARATHE
MARATHE
Date: 2022.05.04
16:53:52 +0530
Date : 29.04.2022
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
: 29.04.2022
: 30.04.2022
: 02.05.2022
( C. V. Marathe )
Addl. Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai.
7
BA 863/22 in CR No.9/22
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT /ORDER”
On 04.05.2022 at 4.45 p.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Mrs. G. P. Acharekar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.)
H.H.J. C. V. Marathe
C.R. No.07
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order
29.04.2022
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on
02.05.2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on
04.05.2022