Mumbai, January 20, 2024 – In a significant development in the ongoing cyber fraud case concerning the Maharashtra State Skill Development Society (MSSDS), the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai granted bail to businessman Nikesh Narayan Tak. The accused was arrested in connection with C.R.No.02/2020 (Corresponding C.R.299/2019 Azad Maidan Police Station) registered at the Nodal Cyber Police Station, Mumbai.
Case Background
The case revolves around an alleged large-scale fraud involving the illegal registration of non-existent training institutes under the MSSDS, which implements various skill development schemes under the State and Central Governments. The accused, Nikesh Tak, was arrested on November 22, 2023, for his alleged involvement in registering a bogus training center, Trimurti Skill Center, and fraudulently obtaining government funds intended for skill development programs.
According to the prosecution, the scheme allowed empaneled training providers to receive Rs. 15,000 per student for mobilization, training, and employment placement. An internal inspection by the MSSDS revealed that ten training institutes within Beed district, Maharashtra, were non-existent despite being registered under the scheme. Furthermore, several of these institutions were allegedly registered on non-working days, indicating fraudulent activity.
Prosecution’s Allegations
The prosecution argued that the accused played a key role in generating false records, manipulating the government’s web portal, and unlawfully receiving public funds. It was alleged that the accused, along with other co-conspirators, falsified student registration details and attendance records to claim financial benefits. The police maintained that the ongoing investigation had not been completed and opposed the bail application, citing concerns that the accused could tamper with evidence, threaten witnesses, or flee from justice.
Court Proceedings and Bail Order
Represented by Advocate Shantanu Kolhe, Nikesh Tak contended that he was falsely implicated and that he had already undergone custodial interrogation. The defense highlighted that other co-accused in the case, including Swati Bhalshankar and Tausif Shaikh, had been granted bail under similar circumstances. The defense also noted that two other accused, Dilip Pawar and Vijay Rise, had received anticipatory bail protection.
The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne, observed that Tak had been in custody for nearly two months. While acknowledging the allegations against him, the court noted that a significant portion of the investigation concerning the Trimurti Skill Center had been completed. The police had already verified facts related to the institution, and remaining evidence was primarily documentary and accessible to the investigating officer.
Considering the principle of parity with other co-accused who had been granted bail, the court concluded that further incarceration of Tak was unwarranted. Consequently, the bail application was approved under the following conditions:
- Bail Amount: The accused was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety bond of Rs. 25,000.
- Non-Tampering Clause: Tak was directed not to interfere with prosecution witnesses or evidence.
- Regular Police Station Attendance: He must report to the concerned police station on the 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month until the charge sheet is filed.
- Travel Restrictions: The accused was barred from leaving India without prior court approval.
- Provisional Cash Bail: A provision for a cash bail of the same amount was made, with an ultimatum to furnish a surety within four weeks. Failure to do so would result in forfeiture of the cash bail.
Legal and Public Reactions
The case has drawn significant attention, given its implications on the governance and transparency of public welfare programs. The fraudulent registration of training centers and misappropriation of government funds have raised concerns regarding oversight mechanisms within the skill development sector.
While the court’s decision to grant bail aligns with legal precedents, the larger investigation into the broader network of fraudulent activities continues. Authorities remain focused on tracking misappropriated funds and holding accountable those responsible for the systemic fraud.
Conclusion
The granting of bail to Nikesh Tak marks another chapter in the unfolding legal battle surrounding the MSSDS cyber fraud case. While the accused is now out on bail, the judicial process will determine his involvement and culpability. As the investigation proceeds, all eyes remain on law enforcement agencies to uncover the full extent of the alleged scam and ensure justice is served.
