Mumbai, March 5, 2024 – Rajkumar Niranjan Lal, a 52-year-old resident of North West Delhi, has been granted bail by the Sessions Court in Greater Mumbai in connection with a major fraud case involving a fake stock market call center operating under the guise of “Trade Global Market.” The case, registered as C.R. No. 3/2023 at the DCB CID Unit-III (Wadala Police Station C.R. No. 5/2023), alleges that Lal and his associates defrauded numerous individuals by promising inflated returns on stock market investments.
Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge Shri S.D. Kulkarni, presiding over Court Room No. 66, granted bail to Lal after considering his application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). Lal was arrested on August 14, 2023, and has been in judicial custody since August 18, 2023, following police custody. He faces charges under Sections 419 (cheating by personation), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 120(B) (criminal conspiracy),1 and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the2 Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections 66(C) (identity theft) and 66(D) (cheating by personation by using computer resource) of the Information Technology Act.3
Defense Arguments and Court’s Reasoning:
Lal’s defense, presented by Advocate Anees Shaikh, argued that he was falsely implicated and that the investigation was completed, with a charge sheet already filed. The defense highlighted that Lal is a permanent resident of Delhi, minimizing the risk of him absconding. It was also argued that he was merely implicated on suspicion and had no direct involvement in the management or operation of the alleged fraudulent call center.
Furthermore, the defense pointed to the fact that nearly 20 co-accused in the same case had already been granted bail, invoking the principle of parity. They emphasized that Lal was neither an employee nor an employer of “Trade Global Market” and that all necessary seizures had been completed during his initial police custody.
In granting bail, Judge Kulkarni noted that Lal had been in judicial custody for over six months, and the investigation was complete. He cited the Supreme Court ruling in P. Chidambaram v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2019), emphasizing that bail decisions should be based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, exercised judiciously.
The court addressed the prosecution’s concerns about Lal being a flight risk due to his Delhi residency and the need to recover funds allegedly transferred to his bank account. Judge Kulkarni reasoned that mere residency in another state cannot be a ground for denying bail. He also stated that custodial interrogation was not necessary to seize the remaining funds, especially since the charge sheet had been filed.
Prosecution’s Stance:
The prosecution, represented by APP Shri Lade, opposed the bail application, arguing that Lal played a major role in the fraudulent scheme. They presented evidence of significant bank transactions in Lal’s account, alleging that he directly benefited from the victims’ money. The prosecution argued that Lal provided advance information about stock market trends to customers, enticing them to invest in various packages without a valid license, and received payments in US dollars.
The prosecution also expressed concerns about Lal potentially absconding, tampering with evidence, and threatening witnesses, given his out-of-state residency.
Bail Conditions:
Judge Kulkarni, however, found that the role of Lal was limited to receiving and re-transferring funds, unlike the co-accused who were present at the call center during the alleged offenses. He concluded that it was not justifiable to keep Lal in custody until the trial’s conclusion, especially considering the prolonged judicial custody and the bail granted to co-accused.
Lal was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety bond of Rs. 50,000. The court imposed several conditions, including:
- He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence.
- He must furnish surety within four weeks of his release.
- He must not leave India without prior court permission.
- He must not involve himself in similar offenses in the future.
- He must appear before the trial court as required.
The court also allowed a provisional cash bail, which will be forfeited if Lal fails to provide surety within the stipulated time. The order was dictated online on February 29, 2024, and signed on March 5, 2024, after necessary corrections.
This case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by law enforcement in tackling sophisticated financial frauds involving digital platforms and cross-state operations. The release of Rajkumar Niranjan Lal on bail marks a significant development in the investigation and underscores the judiciary’s commitment to balancing individual liberty with the need to ensure justice.