Mumbai, February 9, 2023 – The Designated Court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act (MPID Act) at the City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai, has granted bail to six individuals who were arrested in connection with a case involving a fake call center that allegedly defrauded Non-Resident Indians (NRIs). The order, passed on January 13, 2023, by His Honour Judge Shri S. M. Tapkire, was made available on February 9, 2023.
The bail was granted to Indreshkumar Ravishankar Pasi, Irfan Iqbal Danawala, Zahid Xavier Shaikh @ Mohammed Zahid Xavier Shaikh, Shreeju Valsan Panickar, Isaivannan Kumar, and Ankush Sanjay Sharma. These individuals were accused in connection with Crime No. 317 of 2022 registered with the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), DCB CID, Zone XI, Kandivali (originally C.R. No. 1129 of 2022 dated December 27, 2022, registered with Goregaon Police Station). The charges against them included Sections 419 (cheating by personation), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention)1 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections2 66(c) (identity theft) and 66(d) (cheating by personation by using computer resource) of the Information Technology Act, and Sections3 3 and 4 of the MPID Act.
According to the prosecution, acting on a tip-off about a fake call center, the EOW raided the premises. It was alleged that employees at this center, including the applicants, would make phone calls to NRIs, falsely claiming to be from Mauritius and inducing them to invest money in a purported Financial Establishment. The investors were then directed to transfer funds into accounts of this fake entity. The EOW’s investigation revealed that the call center was operating without legal permission, relying on an agreement with SECURCAP SECURITIES Limited. The total amount of deposits allegedly obtained through these illegal activities was ₹66,59,600. The applicants were alleged to be employees of the prime accused, Aditya Maheshwari and Giriraj Damani (who were yet to be arrested), and were involved in providing investment information over phone calls. The prosecution contended that the applicants were aware of the illegal nature of the activities and acted with a common intention to deceive investors.
The applicants argued that they were merely employees of a company called One 721 Global Services Pvt. Ltd. and were falsely implicated. They claimed that while they were arrested, the alleged owners, handlers, Directors, and Managers of the company (accused no. 1 to 3) were not. They asserted that no specific allegations detailing their individual roles were made against them. They also pointed out that 25 female and 40 male colleagues who were also working in the same company were only served notices under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. and released, while they were arrested. The applicants further argued that no investor had specifically accused them, and the alleged Financial Establishment, SECURCAP SECURITIES Limited, was based in Mauritius, with no investors or establishment residing in Maharashtra, thus questioning the applicability of the MPID Act. They also cited legal precedents stating that charges under the Information Technology Act Sections 66(c) and 66(d) cannot be combined with IPC offences. The defense highlighted that electronic devices and documents had already been seized, and nothing incriminating was recovered from the applicants during their police custody. They emphasized that the main accused were still at large, and there was no reason for their continued detention.
The EOW strongly opposed the bail, arguing that each applicant was a key participant in the crime, actively involved in making fraudulent calls from the fake call center to deceive investors into depositing money in a Financial Establishment not based in India. They claimed that many investors had confirmed being cheated by the applicants. The prosecution stated that they had seized various electronic devices and documents and that the involvement of each applicant was supported by documentary evidence.
After considering the arguments and the available records, Judge Tapkire noted that while 10 accused were implicated in the crime, the applicants were allegedly employees of One 721 Global Services Pvt. Ltd. and were being paid for their work. They were arrested on December 27, 2021, and remanded in police custody until January 2, 2023, during which nothing further was discovered or seized from them. The core allegation was that they made internet calls to NRIs, providing investment information that led to deposits in a dubious Financial Establishment. The court observed that the applicants appeared to be salaried employees and not the beneficiaries of the deposited amounts. The initial complaint was lodged by a police constable. While an unauthorized call center was operating, the court found that the allegations against the applicants, coupled with the EOW’s objections, did not provide a sufficiently strong basis for their indefinite custodial detention. Therefore, the court was inclined to grant them bail with stringent conditions.
The court ordered the release of the six applicants on bail, subject to each of them executing a Personal Recognizance (PR) Bond of ₹5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) and furnishing one or two solvent sureties of the like amount. The order also imposed the following conditions:
i. The applicants shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence and shall not pressurize any prosecution witness.
ii. The applicants shall attend every date of the trial without fail.
iii.The applicants shall cooperate in the investigation whenever required for interrogation.
iv.The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
v. The applicants shall submit their proper residential address proof, telephone, and cell numbers to the EOW for contact.
vi.The applicants shall submit their passports to the EOW, if they possess any.
vii.The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
viii.The applicants are directed to record their presence with the Respondent/Investigating Agency every Wednesday between 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. until the charge sheet is submitted.
ix. Any disobedience or breach of these conditions will lead to the cancellation of the bail order.
The EOW was directed to take note of the order, and the Bail Application No. 2 of 2023 was disposed of accordingly. This case highlights the judiciary’s consideration of the role and potential culpability of employees versus the alleged masterminds in financial fraud cases, even while imposing strict conditions to ensure cooperation with the ongoing investigation and trial.