Mumbai, Maharashtra – January 30, 2024 – Romin Chandrakant Chheda’s bail application has been rejected in connection with a case involving fraud and forgery related to the installation of oxygen generation plants during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Designated Judge under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act (MPID Act), Aditee Uday Kadam, of the City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai, rejected his bail application (Bail Application No. 38 of 2024) citing allegations of forgery, financial scam, and potential tampering of evidence.
Background of the Case:
Chheda was arrested and charged under Sections 218 (public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture),1 418 (cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender is bound to protect), 465 (forgery), 4672 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record)3 read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code4 (IPC). The case (C.R. No. 65 of 2023) was registered with the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Mumbai Police, based on an FIR (No. 0929 of 2023) originally registered at Nagpada Police Station.
Allegations and Arrest:
According to the prosecution, Chheda’s company, Highway Construction Company, was awarded two tenders by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) in 2021 for the installation of oxygen generation plants at MCGM hospitals and Jumbo COVID Centers. The plants were to be installed within 30 days. However, the installation was delayed, resulting in a penalty of Rs. 3,16,32,426. The prosecution alleges that Chheda, in collusion with MCGM officials, forged documents, including handing over and taking over reports, to reduce the penalty. They claim that the plants were not commissioned within the stipulated time and that the documents were manipulated to show earlier completion dates.
Defense Arguments:
Mr. Ayush S. Pasbola, representing Chheda, argued that the allegations were based on contractual liability and that the delay was due to issues with the supply of copper pipes. He claimed that the oxygen samples were collected and tested within the stipulated time, and there was no allegation of impurity or fabrication of test reports. He also argued that the penalty had already been recovered by the state. He cited the case of Md. Ibrahim and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar to argue that there was no basis for the forgery charges. He emphasized that Chheda had been in custody since November 24, 2023, and that most of the investigation was complete.
Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:
Ms. Seema Deshpande, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), argued that Chheda had colluded with MCGM officials and obtained oxygen sample reports from a laboratory in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, under suspicious circumstances. She stated that the plants were supplied between September and December 2021, well beyond the 30-day deadline. She pointed out that many handing over and taking over reports lacked signatures of concerned authorities and that a thorough investigation was necessary. She argued that Chheda was not qualified to obtain the tender and had manipulated the process for unlawful gain. She contended that releasing Chheda on bail would lead to tampering of evidence.
Court’s Observations and Decision:
Judge Kadam noted that Chheda had obtained the contract and was penalized for the delay. She observed that there were allegations of collusion with MCGM officials and that the handing over and taking over reports were obtained in October 2021, not within the stipulated time. She pointed out the suspicious circumstances surrounding the oxygen sample reports and the lack of dates on some of the handing over and taking over reports.
“Suspect is created since inception i.e. obtaining tender without possessing sufficient qualification for the same and obtaining reports from the Laboratories at another State. Some reports of handing over and taking over does not bear dates of signing the same. It cannot be taken as mere irregularity,” Judge Kadam stated in her order.
The court also noted that the transactions occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and that a forensic audit was yet to be conducted. She emphasized the large amount of public funds involved and the possibility of tampering with evidence.
“Uncontroverted allegations reflected in the material on record, prima facie reveals the complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence which involves huge financial scam of public fund. It is necessary to investigate the matter in it’s true sense. In such circumstances, if the applicant would be released on bail, there is every possibility that he may flee away from justice and tamper with the prosecution evidence,” Judge Kadam stated.
The court concluded that the allegations were serious and that releasing Chheda on bail would hinder the investigation and potentially lead to tampering of evidence.
Significance of the Ruling:
This ruling highlights the court’s strict approach towards economic offenses involving public funds, especially those committed during a crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. The court’s decision underscores the importance of thorough investigation and the need to prevent tampering of evidence in such cases.
Key Factors in the Bail Rejection:
- Allegations of forgery and financial scam.
- Suspicious circumstances surrounding the oxygen sample reports.
- Lack of dates on handing over and taking over reports.
- Large amount of public funds involved.
- Potential for tampering of evidence.
- Ongoing investigation and pending forensic audit.
Future Proceedings:
The investigation will continue, and the prosecution will gather further evidence to support the charges against Chheda. The court will monitor the progress of the investigation and ensure that the trial proceeds in a fair and just manner.