Mumbai, February 29, 2024 – Rajesh Vishwanatha Shetty, a 52-year-old businessman from Karnataka, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai in connection with a multi-crore fraud case. Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne (Court Room No. 30) rejected the bail application on February 23, 2024.
Shetty was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 10/2024, registered with DCB CID Unit-XI, Mumbai (corresponding to C.R. No. 51/2024, Andheri Police Station), for offenses under Sections 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 465 (forgery), 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine1 a forged document or electronic record),2 472 (making or possessing counterfeit seal, etc., with intent to commit forgery punishable under section 467), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention)3 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Background and Allegations:
The prosecution alleges that Shetty, acting as an agent and mediator, induced the complainant to invest lakhs of rupees by falsely representing that one Shashikiran T.R. had received Rs. 100 crores. Shetty claimed that to release this amount, taxes and payments to RBI officers were required, and thus, Rs. 20 lakhs were needed. Investors were promised returns of Rs. 100 crores for their Rs. 20 lakh investment.
During the arrest, documents such as Zink Metal Corporation agreements, reports, testing reports, an RBI certificate, a cheque book, and a passbook were recovered from Shetty’s possession. The prosecution alleges that these documents, including the reports and agreements, were forged.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Ajay Dube, representing Shetty, argued that his client was falsely implicated and had already undergone custodial interrogation. He emphasized that the investigation was complete, Shetty was the sole earning member of his family, and he had no prior criminal record. He also highlighted that Shetty was a permanent resident of Karnataka.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Iqbal Solkar opposed the bail, arguing that Shetty’s release would hamper the ongoing investigation and increase the risk of him fleeing justice or tampering with evidence.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Sasne noted the seriousness of the allegations, including forgery and falsification of documents, and the inducement of individuals to invest money with promises of high returns. The court also considered that the investigation was still in progress and that Shetty was a resident of Karnataka, which increased the risk of him absconding.
The court emphasized the need for detailed investigation into the fabrication of government documents and certificates. Given the ongoing investigation, the court concluded that Shetty was not entitled to bail at this stage.
Order Issued:
The court rejected Shetty’s bail application, concluding that granting bail at this stage would hamper the ongoing investigation and increase the risk of the accused fleeing justice. The order was signed on February 28, 2024, and uploaded on February 29, 2024, at 3:57 p.m.
This decision reflects the court’s concern over the seriousness of the alleged offenses, the ongoing investigation, and the potential for the accused to abscond or tamper with evidence.