Mumbai, February 4, 2022 – The Sessions Court for Greater Bombay has granted bail to Ramsavare R. Prajapati, accused in a cheating and forgery case. Additional Sessions Judge Deepak L. Bhagwat, presiding over Court Room No. 60, allowed the bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 85 of 2022), citing the accused’s claim of being a victim himself and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation.

Prajapati was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 739 of 2021, registered at Pant Nagar Police Station, for offenses under sections 420 (cheating), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 465 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), and 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record) read with 34¹ (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Allegations and Arrest:

According to the prosecution, Prajapati induced the complainant to pay him ₹40 lakhs under the pretext of securing two flats for the complainant in a MHADA scheme. He allegedly issued forged MHADA letters showing that the flats had been sanctioned.

Defense Arguments:

Prajapati, through his advocate Sameer Bhandari, argued that he was himself a victim. He claimed that the complainant had approached him and, being unable to arrange cash due to his salary being paid by cheque, requested Prajapati to act as an intermediary and deliver the money to accused No. 2. He stated that he received no amount and was not a beneficiary. He also pointed out that he had issued cheques in favor of the complainant, indicating he had no intention to cheat. He expressed his readiness to cooperate with the investigation.

Prosecution’s Objections:

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Seema Deshpande, opposed the bail application. She argued that the investigation was ongoing, the charge sheet had not been filed, and the amount was transferred to Prajapati’s account.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

Judge Bhagwat, after hearing arguments and reviewing the record, made the following observations:

• Cheques Issued: The court noted that Prajapati had issued cheques in favor of the complainant.
• Amount Given to Co-Accused: The court acknowledged that the investigation revealed Prajapati had given the entire ₹40 lakhs to accused No. 2.
• Offenses Triable by Magistrate: The court noted that the offenses were triable by a Metropolitan Magistrate.
• Police Custody Over: The court observed that Prajapati’s police custody period was over.
• Cooperation with Investigation: The court considered Prajapati’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation.

Judge Bhagwat concluded that further detention in custody would serve no purpose and that it was appropriate to grant bail subject to certain conditions.

Conditions of Bail:

The court granted Prajapati bail on the following conditions:

• He must execute a Personal Bond (P.B.) of ₹50,000 and provide one or two solvent sureties of the same amount.
• Provisional cash security of ₹50,000 was permitted for one month in lieu of the surety bond.
• He must attend Pant Nagar Police Station every Monday between 10:00 AM and 12:00 PM until the charge sheet is filed.
• He must submit a list of at least three blood relatives with their detailed residential addresses and work addresses (if any), along with documentary proof.
• He and the surety must inform the police and the trial court of any change in their residential addresses.
• He must submit copies of at least two documents among PAN card, Aadhaar card, ration card, electricity bill, voter ID card, or property documents.
• The investigating officer must conduct physical verification of the residential address.
• He must not induce or threaten any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with evidence.
• He must not leave the territorial limits of Mumbai without prior court permission.
• Conditions 5 to 8 must be complied with simultaneously with the furnishing of cash security or surety bond.
• Bail must be furnished before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate.

Significance of the Order:

This order highlights the court’s consideration of:

• Accused’s Claim of Being a Victim: The court considered Prajapati’s claim of being an intermediary rather than a beneficiary.
• Issuance of Cheques: The court noted the issuance of cheques as an indication of possible lack of intent to cheat.
• Cooperation with Investigation: The court considered the accused’s willingness to cooperate.
• Police Custody Period: The court noted that the police custody period was over.
• Conditions to Ensure Compliance: The court imposed stringent conditions to ensure the accused’s presence and prevent any interference with the investigation.

This ruling demonstrates the court’s approach in balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of justice, particularly when considering bail applications in cases involving financial offenses.