CRI. BA 1555/2022
1
ORDER
MHCC020084002022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1555 OF 2022
(CNR NO.:MHCC020084002022)
Kalpesh Dilip Kapadia
Age : 48 years, Occ.: Service.
Add.: Jaswanti Residency,
Flat No.1301, 13th Floor,
Subhash Galli, Shankar Lane,
Opp. Shankar Temple,
Kandivali (West),
Mumbai – 400 067.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Economic
Offences Wing (E.O.W.)vide
C.R.No.119/2018)
…Applicant/Accused
…Respondent/State.
Appearance:
Shri. Sanjiv Yadav, Advocate for the applicant/Accused.
Smt. Seema Deshpande, Ld. Addl. P.P., for the State/respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
ANAND PANDURANG KANADE (C.R.60)
DATE
: 29.07.2022.
CRI. BA 1555/2022
2
ORDER
ORDER
1.
Vide present application under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, the applicant requested to release him on bail in
Crime No. 119 of 2018 registered at Economic Offences Wing (E.O.W.)
for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 r/w. 34 of Indian
Penal Code.
2.
Prosecution case in nutshell is as under :
Yash Himanshu Shah is resident of 401, Divine Jalpan,
Jambali Galli, Boriwali (W), Mumbai. It is the case of prosecution that
prime Accused No. 1 Premchand Mittal and his associates i.e. present
applicant/accused, Kisan Tiwari and Archana Singh have conspired
together and dishonestly induced the complainant Yash Shah and
witness Dilip Maheshwari on the false promise of giving these two
persons amount more than market value of the goods. It is their case
that they have further induced the complainant and the witness by
paying the amount of goods taken on credit and thereby, generated
confidence in them. Prosecution has alleged that accused persons after
gaining full confidence of complainant and witnesses have taken goods
on credit worth Rs.11,90,07,873/ and they failed to pay the said
amount to the complainant and to witness. Hence, complainant has
filed report against the accused with Vakola Police Station. On that
basis, initially Crime No. 586 of 2018 came to be registered. Thereafter,
it was transferred to E.O.W., Mumbai and C.R. No. 119 of 2018 came to
be registered. On 26.05.2022, applicant/accused came to be arrested
and remanded in police custody and on 08.06.2022 taken in judicial
custody. The applicant/accused has filed the present application to
release him on bail. He raised the grounds that Accused No. 1 is the
CRI. BA 1555/2022
3
ORDER
prime accused of the present case. Applicant/accused was working as a
manager for Accused No. 1. In the FIR and other papers in
investigation, no primary role is attributed to the present applicant.
Applicant is not a master mind behind the alleged offence. There is no
wrongful gain to the present applicant and wrongful loss to the first
informant and other witnesses at the hands of present applicant. The
prosecution further claimed that present applicant as per the directions
of Accused No. 1 prepared receipt for Rs. 2,71,00,000/. That receipt is
forged receipt. According to the applicant, he has not committed any
forgery in respect any documents. All the documents which include
ledger books, bills, lorry receipts with respect to the alleged transactions
between the Accused No. 1 and the complainant have been recovered at
the instance of Accused No. 1 and nothing is to be recovered at the
instance of present applicant. The real dispute is of civil nature. The
complainant has filed Commercial Summary Suit before the Hon’ble
High Court, Mumbai against the Accused No. 1. According to applicant,
his further custody is not essential. He is ready to obey the terms and
conditions that may be imposed on him. On the aforesaid grounds,
applicant prayed to enlarge him on bail.
3.
In the present case, the Ld. Addl. P.P. and I.O. filed their
Say at Exh – 2 and resisted bail application. In the present case, original
complainant and witness filed intervention application and filed their
written notes of arguments. The intervener and I.O. opposed the bail
application on the grounds that FIR clearly shows the involvement of
applicant/accused in the present case. The investigation of offence is at
preliminary stage and there is huge possibility that if the accused is
released on bail, he may threaten the complainant and other material
witnesses and tamper with documentary evidence. From the very first
CRI. BA 1555/2022
4
ORDER
transaction, there was intention to cheat and induce the complainant to
deliver the huge amount of material. The applicant and other
coaccused are habitual offenders and doing business with other
businessmen with the sole intention to cheat other businessmen by
establishing business relationship. The modusoperandi of the applicant
and other coaccused is similar in each and every transaction. Receipt
dated 22.12.2016 was produced by coaccused in Anticipatory Bail
Application was false, fabricated and forged with the signature of
complainant. Complainant had never signed on the said receipt. The
said receipt is in the custody of present accused or his companions.
However, during the custodial interrogation, the accused has misled
investigating machinery. On the aforesaid grounds, it is prayed to reject
the bail application.
4.
Heard both the sides. Perused police papers on record.
After going through the papers, it reveals that the Anticipatory Bail
Application No. 1047 of 2019 filed by Accused No. 1 Premchand Ashok
Mittal is allowed. It also reveals that the complainant has filed
Commercial Summary Suit No. 366 of 2019 against the coaccused
Premchand Mittal for the recovery of the amount. After going through
the papers on record, it reveals that the dispute between the parties is of
civil nature. It also reveals from police papers that I.O. seized the books
of accounts, bills, ledger and lorry receipts regarding alleged
transactions. From the Say of I.O. by Exh – 7, it reveals that original
receipt dated 22.12.2016 is with Accused No.1. Since 08.06.2022,
present applicant/accused is in judicial custody. Considering role
attributed to the present applicant, I am of view that his further custody
is not needed. Applicant/accused is permanent resident of given address
and he is ready to abide by the terms and conditions that may be put on
CRI. BA 1555/2022
5
ORDER
him. No justified ground is made out for the further detention of
applicant/accused. In the reason, I am of view that application deserves
to be allowed. In the reason, following order.
:ORDER:
1.
The Criminal Bail Application No. 1555 of 2022 is allowed as
under.
2.
The applicant accused namely Kalpesh Dilip Kapadia be released
on bail on executing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/ and one or two
solvent sureties of the same amount in E.O.W. Crime No. 119 of 2018
registered at Economic Offences Wing (E.O.W.).
3.
Cash security of Rs.50,000/ is permitted provisionally for the
period of 1 month in lieu of the surety bond.
4.
The accused shall attend the Economic Offences Wing (E.O.W.)
on every Thursday in between 11.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. till filing of the
chargesheet.
5.
The accused shall submit a list of atleast 3 blood relatives with
their detailed residential addresses and also the addresses of their place
of work if any, and documentary proof of showing the correctness of the
details provided by them.
6.
The accused and the surety shall inform the police authorities as
well as the trial court, the change of their residential address while the
accused is on bail.
7.
The accused shall submit copies of at least 2 documents amongst
the Pan Card, Adhar card, Ration card, Electricity Bill, Voter ID card
issued by the election commission or the documents in respect of
immovable properties owned by him.
8.
After submission of the documents as mentioned above, the
Investigating Officer shall conduct physical verification of the residential
CRI. BA 1555/2022
6
ORDER
address so as to confirm the address appearing on those documents.
9.
The accused shall not make any inducement or threat to any
person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with
the evidence.
10.
The accused shall not leave territorial limits of Mumbai without
prior permission of the court.
11.
The accused shall not commit any offence similar to the offences
of which he is accused in the present matter.
12.
Conditions No. 5 and 7 shall be complied with simultaneous to
the furnishing of the cash security or the surety bond whichever is
earlier.
13.
Bail before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate.
Anand
Pandurang
Kanade
Digitally signed
by Anand
Pandurang
Kanade
Date:
2022.08.01
12:31:45 +0530
(Anand P. Kanade)
Addl. Sessions Judge
Sessions Court,
Mumbai. C.R. 60
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Date of sign
: 29.07.2022
: 30.07.2022
: 30.07.2022
CRI. BA 1555/2022
7
ORDER
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
01/08/2022, 12.40 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mr. Prasad S. Pednekar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court
Room No.)
HHJ Anand P. Kanade,(C.R.No.60)
Addl. Sessions Judge.,City Civil &
Sessions Court,
Date of pronouncement of /Order
29.07.2022
Order signed by P.O. on
30.07.2022
Order uploaded on
01.08.2022