1
BA No.1796/22
MHCC020096942022
BEFORE THE DESIGNATED COURT UNDER M.P.I.D. ACT
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURT, MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1796 OF 2022
( C.N.R. NO. MHCC020096942022 )
Shani @ Shanikumar Hanumant Ingle,
Age : 32 years, Occ : Business
Residing at Sitadel Building, Flat No.101, ‘A’ Wing,
Chum Darisa Builder, Khar Danda, Pali Hill,
Khar (West), Mumbai.
]
]
] Applicant/
]… Accused
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
]
(At the instance of Bandra Police Station, Mumbai) ]… Respondents
Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Mr. Sanket Thange for the Applicant.
Ld. SPP Malankar for the State/ Respondents.
Ld. Advocate Mr. Abhijeet Gosavi for the Intervenor.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI S. M. TAPKIRE
(Court Room no. 7)
DATED : 28th November, 2022.
ORAL ORDER
1.
This is an application under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, to have liberty to applicant/accused in the crime vide
C.R.No.110 of 2022, registered with Bandra Police
offence
120B
punishable
of
under
the Indian
Section
Penal
Code,
420
Station
for
the
r/w Sections
34
and
1860
(hereinafter referred
2
“IPC”)
and
under
Sections
3
with
4
BA No.1796/22
of
The Maharashtra
Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act,
1999 (hereinafter referred “MPID Act”).
2.
The respondent and intervenor Shashikumar Rajaram Bhujbal
have strongly opposed to the bail plea of applicant by filing
their written say at Exhibit02 and Exhibit04 respectively.
3.
Perused
coupled
written
the
with
application, plea
documents
objection
of
relied
intervenor
grievance
by them.
and
grounds
Also
raised
perused
respondent/EOW.
the
Heard
the learned Advocate of applicant and intervenor as well as the Ld. SPP.
4.
Taking
into
consideration, rival
submissions,
contentions
and availed record it inclined in impugned crime in all 8 accused are
involved.
to
be
Except three accused, the rests
detected
and
arrested.
of
The
the accused
are yet
informant/intervenor
Shashikumar Bhujabal has raised plea grievances accusations that
he is having business of Contractor.
In January2021, his relative
Mahesh Jagdale has introduced him with the accused – Chetan Chavan,
he informed him that his companion is having business of purchase of
gold on
huge
goldsmiths
earns huge
scale
and
the
same
selling
without charging GST. Thereby in
benefits.
various
said business he
Thereby he has insisted to him to invest his
money in said business which was
Santosh Ingle with
to
other
conducted
accused.
In
by the accused No.1
February 2021,
the
meeting with regard to investing the amount of informant was held. All
the accused were present and insisted him to invest the initial amount
of Rs.12,50,000/ in their business scheme and return amount of
3
BA No.1796/22
Rs.50,000/ per month will be provided to him.
Thereby time to time
the informant and other seven investors have invested huge amount
which is in tune of Rs.1,72,00,000/. However, the entire amount by
induced cheated them, misappropriated and committed fraudulent
default.
5.
The applicant has come with the case that he is arrested
on 23.03.2022. Now investigation is completed and charge sheet is
already submitted. Against them just raised the frevious allegations
which are
prima
unbelievable.
facie
unconsiderable
unsustainable
and
The complainant has merely alleged that he has paid
huge amount to accused by as
cash
reliable/applicable.
of nature of allegations raised against
In
view
the same is, prima
facie not
him, the offence under MPID Act prima facie does not constitute.
Against him just raised plea that he is being the brother of accused
No.1, was also accompanied with him and thereby involved in
impunged crime. The story put forth against him in various documents
prima
facie does
not believable
and
acceptable.
In
view
of
submissions of respondent Investigating Officer and Ld. SPP, it would
transpire entire relevant material facts and circumstances are already
investigated. While
recovered
or
his
discovered.
custodial interrogation
nothing
seized,
As per reply of Investigating Officer and
prosecution it reveals the inevitable time would took for complying the
investigation against other accused and submission of final charge
sheet. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following
decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court, Hon’ble High Court Bombay and other
Hon’ble High Court are as follows :
a.
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr., reported as
2014 ALL SCR 2542.
4
BA No.1796/22
b.
Jagdish Shrivastav Vs. State of Maharashtra decided on
11.03.2022 by a Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal
(Crl.) No(s). 1758/2022
c.
R. Vasudevan vs. CBI, New Delhi reported in 2010 (3)
Crimes 151.
d.
Rajesh S/o. Suresh Joshi Vs. State of Maharashtra, Thr.
Crime Br. (EOW), in Bail Application No.634/2015 decided
on 08.10.2015.
e.
Shri. P. Chidambaram vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
decided on 22.10.2019 by Criminal Appeal 1603/2019.
f.
N. Raghavender vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, CBI in
Criminal Appeal No.05/2010.
g.
Sunder Singh Bhati vs. The State (NCT of Delhi), decided on
17.01.2022 by B.A. No.3750/2021.
On relying aforesaid decisions and raised submissions,
vehemently submitted now, there is no any cogent reason cause ground
remained for determining him behind bar for uncertain period, thereby
asked the relief for liberty.
6.
The Respondent and informant/intervenor have vehemently
opposed to the bail plea applicant principally on the grounds that in the
impugned crime the involvement of huge deposit amount of Rs.7.4
Crores of in all 8 depositors is there. The applicant is a history sheeter..
The companions of applicant, remaining 5 accused are yet to be
detected and arrested. The applicant is also a main culprit. He has
actually accepted huge amount from various depositors/investors by
inducing them to provide smart return on their investment amount and
by lured, assured misappropriated huge amount. Against the applicant
also raised the allegations
investors.
of
threatening,
pressurizing
to
the
The entire and exhaustive investigation is yet to be
completed. The huge siphoned off Rs.7.4 Crores is also yet to be
detected revealed and transpired. Till now no any property of any of
the
accused detected secured and seized.
The applicant is history
5
BA No.1796/22
sheeter and against him certain similar in natures crimes are raised and
pending. Therefore, it would not appropriate to have liberty to him as
against him considerable appreciable cogent evidence is availed with
regard his involvement participation in the impunged crime. They both
have raised general objection.
7.
In above such circumstances having into consideration,
rival submissions, contentions availed record by it prima facie revealed
the applicant is arrested on 23.03.2022. The charge sheet is submitted
on 28.06.2022.
The intervener/informant Shashikumar Rajaram
Bhujbal alleged that the applicant alongwith his companions by giving
promises/assurance to give smart return on the invested amount,
accepted the amount of Rs.1.72 Crores towards investment and
committed fraudulent default. The applicant was actively involved in
impugned crime.
rejected.
The bail plea of accused NO.1 and 3 is already
The other accused are yet to be detected and transpired.
Though the charge sheet is submitted, however, against the applicant
sufficient considerable, reliable, appreciable evidence is availed.
By
such rival submissions, contentions and availed record, it inclined
against the applicant charge sheet is submitted on 28.06.2022. The
same is registered by as Special MPID Case No.812/2022. The bail plea
of other accused Kalpana Ingle and Santosh Ingle has been rejected on
the ground that investigation is yet to be completed and other accused
are yet to be detected, transpired and arrested. Moreover that time,
against them chargesheet was not submitted. However, now the charge
sheet is submitted against the arrested accused.
Furthermore,
considering the entire record, prima facie inclined the substantial
material, allegations are just raised against the accused No.1 Santosh
Ingle. Against the present applicant just alleged that he has purchased
6
BA No.1796/22
the gold from alleged the investment amount in all of Rs.79 Lacs, except
that no any seriously considerable, cognizable allegations have been
raised against him.
The investigation agency has seized a flat
plot/premises and freezed various bank account of accused.
By it
prima facie transpired the substantial material, relevant fact and
circumstances are already investigated. However as the certain accused
are yet to be arrested and detected, thereby certain inevitable time
would required to complete the entire investigation and submit the final
charge sheet against all the accused. Without same certainly trial could
not be proceed. In the circumstances, I felt it would not appropriate to
detain the applicant behind bar for uncertain period or until the
conclusion of the trial. However, in view of objection of respondent and
intervener, it would appropriate by saddling stringent conditions to
have the liberty to applicant. Hence, passed the following order :
ORDER
1.
The present Bail Application No.1796/2022 is hereby allowed,
subject to following conditions:
a)
The applicant Shani @ Shanikumar Hanumant Ingle, Age : 32
years, Occ : Business, Residing at Sitadel Building, Flat No.101,
‘A’ Wing, Chum Darisa Builder, Khar Danda, Pali Hill, Khar
(West), Mumbai be released on executing a PR Bond of Rs.
5,00,000/ (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) with furnishing one or
two solvent sureties in the like amount in crime vide C.R.
No.110/2022 registered with EOW, Mumbai for the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 r/w Sections 120B and
34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 and 4 of
Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999.
b)
The applicant shall not tamper or hamper the prosecution
witnesses and evidence as well as pressurize to any of the
prosecution witness by any manner.
c)
The applicant shall cooperate in investigation, as and whenever
he required for interrogation, he shall avail for the same.
7
BA No.1796/22
d)
The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of
Court.
e)
The applicant shall record his attendance with respondent/EOW
and Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 11.00
a.m. to 05.00 p.m. until further order.
f)
The applicant shall not indulged in any criminal activity.
g)
The applicant shall deposit his passport with the
respondent/EOW and Investigating Officer, if any, availed by
him.
h)
The applicant shall not alienate, transfer, sell or create any third
party interest over any movable or immovable properties standing
in the name of his firm, his own name and in the name of his
blood relatives without prior permission of this Court.
i)
The applicant shall submit his proper considerable residential
address proof as well as telephone and cell numbers with
respondent/EOW and Investigating Officer in view of his contact.
j)
In case of disobedience or breach of any saddled condition by
applicant, this order will liable to be canceled.
2.
Accordingly, respondent/EOW and the concern I.O. to take the
note of this order.
3.
The present Bail Application No.1796 of 2022 stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
Date : 28.11.2022.
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Draft given on
Signed on
: 28.11.2022.
: 28.11.2022.
: 28.11.2022.
: 01.12.2022.
( S. M. Tapkire)
Addl. Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai.
8
BA No.1796/22
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT /ORDER”
On 01.12.2022 at 03.16 a.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Ms. Manisha D. Hirole
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.)
H.H.J. S. M. Tapkire
C.R. No.07
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order
28.11.2022
Judgment /Order signed by P.O. on
01.12.2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on
01.12.2022