O-B.A.545.2024
1
Dt.25.07.2024
MHCC020105052024
BEFORE THE DESIGNATED COURT UNDER M. P. I. D. ACT
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURT, Gr. BOMBAY.
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 545 OF 2024
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO.722 OF 2024
IN
M.E.C.R.NO.08 OF 2016
Piyush Rajesh Mehta
Age 36 years, Occupation- Business,
Address : C-403, Shri Complex,
Muktaadand Marg, Chata Road,
Vapi, Pardi , Valsad, Vapi,
Gujrat-396191
Current Address: 107, Aasthana Home,
Triveni Society, Near GEB Balitha, Vapi,
Gujrat- 396191
Applicant/Accused
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of M.I.D.C. police
station, Mumbai
…Respondents
Coram : HHJ SHRI N.G. SHUKLA,
(Court No. 20)
Date
: 25.07.2024
Appearance:
Ld. Adv. Mr. Bharat Mane for Applicant/accused.
Ld. APP. Mrs. Chaitrali Panshikar for the Respondent/State-EOW.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
01.

By way of this application, applicant who is arrested in
O- B.A.545.2024
2
Dt.25.07.2024
M.E.C.R.No.08/2016 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of
The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as “IPC”) and Sections 3, 4
and 5 of The Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in
Financial Establishments) Act (here-in-after referred as “MPID Act”) is
seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(here in after referred as “Cr.P.C.” ).
02.

Ld. Adv. Ms. Chaitrali Panshikar filed reply (Exh.2) and opposed
the application.
03.

Case of the prosecution in brief is that, applicant was dealing in
export of spectacles. In May 2014, applicant represented informant that
there is lot of profit in business of export of spectacles and if informant
invest money in the said business, the applicant would give him 3%
profit on the investment. Informant initially invested Rs.10,000/- on
which applicant gave him profit at the rate of 3%. Again informant
invested Rs.20,000/- and Rs. 30,000/-. Till date of lodging complaint,
informant had invested in all Rs.1,00,000/-. Informant received profit at
the rate 3% from the applicant till the year 2015. It is further alleged
that applicant insisted informant to invest more amount. Hence,
informant collected amount from his friends and relatives. It is further
alleged that, since January 2015 till May 2015 informant has personally
collected Rs.1,52,00,000/- from his friends and relatives and handed
over to applicant and his wife for investing it in export of spectacles
business. However, applicant has not given profit as assured and even
not returned principal amount invested by them in scheme.
04.

On 30.06.2015, applicant has given post dated cheque of
Rs.1,85,00,000/- signed by him, which included profit of
O- B.A.545.2024
3
Dt.25.07.2024
Rs.33,00,000/-. Informant deposited cheque on its maturity in Panjab
National Bank. It was informed by bank to the applicant that, there is
variation in signatures of applicant. As informant had not received
amount hence he lodged complaint in Special Designated Court. As per
direction of court, FIR came to be registered against the applicant. As
the applicant was absconded he could not be arrested, hence police had
filed “A” summary report. After tracing out applicant/accused, police
opened case and arrested the applicant/accused.
05.

Ld. Advocate for the applicant argued that allegations against the
accused is that he deceived and induced informant for investing money
and accordingly informant had invested Rs.1,00,000/- in total.
Informant received profit at the rate of 3% till March 2015. There are
total seven depositors and only 57,00,000/- was invested. There is no
calculation that how amount of Rs. 1,52,00,000/- is shown in say of
police. Applicant/accused had given cheque to return the amount to the
informant. Other depositors have not directly given amount to deposit
to the applicant. They had given amount to informant. Hence, it can not
be said that applicant had committed fraud of other depositors. Ld.
advocate for the applicant further argued that applicant is arrested on
12.05.2024. There is no progress in the investigation during his police
custody. Investigation is completed and statements of witnesses were
recorded in 2016. There is no amount in bank account of the applicant.
Say of the police does not disclose any reason to oppose bail
application. Applicant is ready to abide conditions of the court if impose
while granting bail. Hence, Ld. advocate for the applicant prayed to
grant bail.
06.

Ld. APP strongly opposed the application and submitted that,
O- B.A.545.2024
4
Dt.25.07.2024
offence is registered in the year 2016, and applicant is arrested in May
2024. Applicant was absconding for eight years. There is every likely
hood of his absconding if released on bail. Applicant has induced
informant to invest money. Statement of informant dated 06.04.2016
shows that, informant had collected amount from his friend and
relatives and given to applicant for investment. Applicant had given
fake cheque to return the amount of investors to the informant.
Investigation is in progress. Hence Ld. APP prayed to reject the
application.
07.

I have considered submission and perused record annexed with
the bail application and say of the police.
08.

It appears from statement of informant that, he had initially
invested Rs. 1,00,000/- in installment with the applicant. Applicant had
paid profit at the rate of 3% to the informant on said amount till March
2015. The principal amount invested by the informant is not returned
by the applicant. Statements of informant and other investors shows
that they had given various amount to the informant for investing with
the applicant. Their statements further shows that informant had given
said amount to the applicant. It shows that informant had not
kept/retained said amount with him and gave it to the applicant for
investment. Thereby, it appears that applicant had accepted deposit to
invest in the business of spectacles on assurance to give profit at the
rate of 3%. Even though the amount of Rs. 1,52,00,000/- mentioned in
the statement of informant is not accepted by the applicant but details
is revealed from the chart given in the bail application itself. When
primary Rs. 57,00,000/- were given by friends and relatives of the
informant. Therefore, informant has give money to the applicant.

O- B.A.545.2024
09.

5
Dt.25.07.2024
As per say of police, said amounts were not return nor profit was
paid by the applicant. It prima facie shows involvement of the applicant
in alleged crime. It appears from record that, offence is registered in the
years 2016 and applicant was absconding for eight years. Applicant is
arrested in the month of May 2024. There is no satisfactory reason or
explanation from the side of applicant for the period of eight year
during which he was absconded and police could not arrest him.
Investigation is in progress hence. I do not find it is a fit case for grant
of bail. Hence, I pass following order.
ORDER
1.

Bail Application 545 of 2024 is reject and stands disposed
off.

Digitally signed by NITIN
GANGADHAR SHUKLA
Date: 2024.07.30 15:01:42
+0530
( N.G. SHUKLA )
Designated Judge under MPID Act, C.R.NO.20
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay.

Dt. 25.07.2024
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Submitted on
:
:
:
Signed on
:
25.07.2024
26.07.2024 AOH
29.07.2024 (27th and 28th Holidays being
Saturday and Sunday
.07.2024
O- B.A.545.2024
6
Dt.25.07.2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
25.07.2024
Mrs. R. R. Hate
Name of the Judge
HHJ Shri N.G. SHUKLA
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
25.07.2024
Judgment and order signed by
P.O.

30.07.2024
Judgment/order uploaded on
30.07.2024