Mumbai, Maharashtra [India] – [April 28, 2024]: A designated court in Mumbai, under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act, has granted bail to Kunal Praful Indulkar, a 37-year-old businessman, who was arrested in connection with an alleged multi-crore investment fraud. The order, passed by Her Honour Judge Aditee Uday Kadam of the City Civil & Sessions Court, Court Room No. 7, was delivered on April 20, 2024.

Indulkar was implicated in C.R. No. 941 of 2023, registered at the Dahisar Police Station. He is accused of offences punishable under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property),¹ 465 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 469 (forgery for purpose of harming reputation), and 471 (using as genuine a forged document² or electronic record) read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC),³ 1860, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the MPID Act, 1999, which deals with fraudulent default by financial establishments.

The prosecution opposed the bail application. Advocate Rahul R. Mishra was allowed to intervene on behalf of the complainant, Vineet Balkrishna Surve.

According to the prosecution’s case, based on the complaint by Surve, who is in the business of money lending, Indulkar and other accused induced him to invest a substantial amount in Indulkar’s firm and other companies, promising good returns. Subsequently, Surve invested ₹1,53,70,000 (Rupees One Crore Fifty Three Lakhs Seventy Thousand only). However, during the course of transactions, Surve allegedly discovered that Indulkar and his parents had deceived him by presenting false and fabricated documents, leading him to file a police report on October 18, 2023.

Advocate Tiwari, representing Indulkar (appearing on behalf of Advocate A. M. Saraogi), argued that, as per the police’s own statement, a significant portion of the invested amount, ₹1,50,16,300 (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Three Hundred only), had already been returned to Surve’s account. He further submitted a pursis (written statement to the court) stating Indulkar’s readiness to deposit an additional ₹3,00,000 into Surve’s account, arguing that Indulkar’s continued detention was unnecessary and he should be released on bail.

The intervenor, Advocate Rahul R. Mishra, also filed a pursis, acknowledging the applicant’s offer to deposit ₹3 Lakhs.

Upon perusal of the record, Judge Aditee Uday Kadam noted that Surve was the sole investor in this case and that the majority of his invested amount had already been secured through repayment. The remaining investigation was primarily based on documentary evidence. The court cited the settled legal principle that physical custody is generally not required for investigations based on documentary evidence. Indulkar was arrested on January 30, 2024, and the court was informed that the chargesheet against him had been filed, indicating the completion of the investigation. Thus, the court opined that keeping Indulkar in custody would serve no further purpose.

Furthermore, Indulkar’s counsel submitted that he had no prior criminal antecedents and was willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the court if granted bail.

Considering all these aspects, the court found merit in allowing the bail application, subject to certain conditions.

The Court’s Order:

1. Bail Application No. 150 of 2024 is hereby allowed and disposed of.
2. The applicant, Kunal Praful Indulkar, is to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. 941 of 2023 registered at Dahisar Police Station, upon furnishing a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of ₹1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) with one or more sureties of the same amount.
3. The applicant is permitted to furnish a provisional cash bail of ₹1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) for a period of three months.
4. The applicant must surrender his passport to the Investigating Officer within one week of his release.
5. The applicant is required to make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when needed, under written intimation.
6. The applicant is prohibited from leaving India without the prior permission of the court.
7. The applicant is restrained from alienating any movable or immovable property in his name or in the name of his wife/children, if any, without the court’s permission.
8. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or pressurize any prosecution witnesses in any manner until the conclusion of the trial.
9. The applicant must furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and keep him updated of any changes.
10. The applicant is required to attend all dates of the trial regularly.

The order was dictated and pronounced in open court on April 20, 2024, and subsequently signed and uploaded on April 22, 2024.

This case highlights the significance of the recovery of funds in economic offence cases when considering bail applications. The fact that the majority of the invested amount was already returned, coupled with the completion of the investigation through the filing of the chargesheet, appears to have been key factors in the court’s decision to grant bail to Kunal Praful Indulkar, albeit with stringent conditions to ensure his cooperation with the ongoing legal proceedings.