Mumbai, January 5, 2024 – In a significant development, the Special Court for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in Greater Bombay granted bail to Akhtar Shahadat Shaikh in Criminal Appeal No. 9/2024, pending the final disposal of his appeal. The appeal challenges his conviction in a high-profile economic offences case involving allegations of fraud and forgery. The bail order was issued by Special Judge S.P. Naik-Nimbalkar on January 4, 2024.

Background of the Conviction

Shaikh, referred to as the appellant and originally accused (A-3), was convicted on December 5, 2023, by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, in Case No. 757/PW/2009. He was found guilty under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The trial court sentenced him to two years of simple imprisonment for each offence, with the sentences to run concurrently. Additionally, he was ordered to pay a fine of ₹25,000, failing which he would have to serve an additional three months of simple imprisonment.

The charges against Shaikh involved allegations of participation in a conspiracy to commit financial fraud, with the forged documents and fraudulent transactions being central to the prosecution’s case.

Appeal and Bail Application

Shaikh’s conviction was promptly challenged through a criminal appeal. Simultaneously, his legal counsel, Advocate S.R. Wani, filed a bail application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which permits suspension of a sentence and release on bail during the pendency of an appeal.

In his arguments, Advocate Wani stressed the following points:

1. Previous Bail Compliance: Shaikh was on bail throughout the trial and adhered to all court-imposed conditions.
2. Absence of Criminal History: He has no prior criminal antecedents and is a permanent resident with deep roots in the community, ensuring no risk of absconding.
3. Presumption of Innocence Pending Appeal: He emphasized that the appellate process is an extension of the right to a fair trial, and the appellant must be given the opportunity to defend his case.
4. Cash Security Already Deposited: Shaikh had already deposited ₹15,000 as cash security and paid the ₹25,000 fine after the trial court suspended his sentence for 30 days on December 5, 2023.

On the other hand, the CBI, represented by Special Public Prosecutor Mr. Gaikwad, vehemently opposed the bail application, citing:

1. Gravity of the Offence: The charges involve serious economic offences, which have a significant impact on public trust.
2. Conviction by a Lower Court: The trial court’s detailed judgment convicted Shaikh after examining substantial evidence.
3. Risk of Absconding: The CBI expressed concerns that Shaikh might abscond if released on bail, potentially delaying justice.
4. Societal Impact: Granting bail in a case of economic fraud could send a wrong message, undermining the deterrence of legal action against white-collar crimes.

Court’s Observations

After hearing arguments from both sides, Special Judge Naik-Nimbalkar noted the following:

• The appellant had already complied with the trial court’s suspension of sentence by depositing the required security and fine amounts.
• Denying bail during the appeal would render the appellate process ineffective, particularly given the concurrent two-year imprisonment sentences.
• The appellant’s behavior during the trial, including consistent compliance with bail conditions, demonstrated a low risk of absconding.
• The nature of the punishment, involving simple imprisonment, and the presumption of innocence pending appeal further supported granting bail.

The court acknowledged the seriousness of economic offences but emphasized the importance of balancing this with the rights of the accused under the appellate process.

Detailed Bail Order

The court passed the following directives:

1. Bail Granted: The bail application (BA No. 40/2024) was allowed, and Shaikh’s sentence was suspended under Section 389(1) of CrPC.
2. Conditions for Bail:
   • Shaikh must execute a personal bond of ₹15,000 and provide one surety in the same amount.
   • Alternatively, he could deposit ₹15,000 as cash security in lieu of a surety bond.
3. Obligation to Attend Court: Shaikh must regularly attend court hearings and fully cooperate to facilitate the early disposal of the appeal.

Timeline and Certification

The oral order was dictated on January 4, 2024, signed by the judge on January 5, 2024, and uploaded to the court records system the same day.

Implications of the Decision

This bail order has significant implications for the legal approach to economic offences. While courts have consistently taken a stringent stance on white-collar crimes, this decision reflects the judiciary’s careful consideration of procedural fairness and the appellant’s rights. By granting bail, the court ensured that the appeal process remains meaningful, balancing accountability for economic offences with fundamental legal principles.

The case will now proceed to the appellate stage, where the conviction and sentence will be scrutinized in detail. The next hearing date has yet to be scheduled.

Nishant Upadhyay