Mumbai, May 10, 2024 – Darshit Kishorchandra Jobaliya and Yash Kadam, accused in an online investment fraud case, have been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai. Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne allowed their bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 1120 of 2024), citing a settlement reached with the complainant and the completion of the initial investigation.
Jobaliya and Kadam were arrested on April 10, 2024, in connection with Crime Register No. 39/2024, registered at Cyber Police Station, North Region, Mumbai, for offenses punishable under sections 419 (cheating by personation), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 465 (forgery), 467 (forgery1 of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine2 a forged document or electronic record), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code3 (IPC), as well as sections 66(C) (identity theft) and 66(D) (cheating by personation by using computer resource) of the Information Technology Act,4 2000.
Prosecution’s Case:
The prosecution alleged that the complainant, Satish Bailur, was induced by the accused to invest in share trading with promises of high returns. Bailur was allegedly defrauded of ₹15,10,000. The police traced the bank accounts and mobile numbers linked to the fraudulent transactions, leading to the arrest of Jobaliya and Kadam.
Defense Arguments:
The defense, represented by Advocate Praful Salvi, argued that their clients were falsely implicated. They stated that the investigation was complete, all recoveries had been made, and the accused had no prior criminal record. They also emphasized that the complainant had executed a consent terms affidavit (page 35), stating that he had received payment and had no further grievances against the accused.
Prosecution’s Objections:
The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Iqbal Solkar, opposed the bail, arguing that releasing the accused could hinder the collection of evidence, pose a flight risk, and lead to witness tampering. They also expressed concern that releasing the accused could impede the arrest of other wanted individuals.
Court’s Decision:
Judge Sasne, after reviewing the documents and hearing the arguments, noted that the investigation regarding the applicants was complete and all recoveries had been made. He dismissed the prosecution’s apprehension about hindering the arrest of other accused as devoid of merit.
The court gave significant weight to the consent terms affidavit provided by the complainant, indicating that a settlement had been reached. Based on this, the court concluded that the continued incarceration of the applicants was not warranted.
Conditions of Bail:
Judge Sasne granted Jobaliya and Kadam bail on the following conditions:
- Each applicant must furnish a personal bond (P.B.) and a surety bond (S.B.) of ₹25,000 with one or two sureties.
- They must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence.
- They must attend the concerned police station on the 2nd and 4th Saturday of every month between 11:00 AM and 2:00 PM until the charge sheet is filed.
- Provisional cash bail of the same amount was allowed, with the accused required to furnish surety within four weeks, failing which the cash bail would be forfeited.
- They must not leave India without prior court permission.
- Bail must be executed before the concerned Magistrate.
Significance of the Order:
This order highlights the court’s consideration of settlements reached between complainants and accused in financial fraud cases. The court’s decision to grant bail, despite the serious charges, reflects the importance of resolving disputes amicably when possible, provided that the investigation is complete and the interests of justice are served.