Mumbai, February 11, 2022 – Ghyanshyam S. Sharma has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in a fraud case. Additional Sessions Judge U.M. Padwad (Court Room No. 30) issued the order on February 11, 2022.

Sharma was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 546/2021, registered at the Santacruz Police Station, for fraud-related offenses.

Background and Allegations:

The complainant alleged that Sharma posed as the General Manager of Union Bank of India, Fort, Mumbai, and offered to arrange a bank guarantee for his finance business. Sharma also arranged a meeting between the complainant and Lokhandwala Builder, promising to secure a Rs. 20 Crore finance.

Sharma then demanded 15% of the bank guarantee amount as commission, with 2% to be paid in advance. The complainant provided documents for a Rs. 10 Crore bank guarantee for Parekh Developers and paid Sharma Rs. 2,00,000 in July 2021.

In September 2021, Sharma approved a bank guarantee draft, and Parekh Developers transferred Rs. 30,00,000 to the complainant, who then transferred Rs. 20,00,000 to Sharma. However, Sharma failed to provide the bank guarantee and gave evasive replies, leading the complainant to file a police report.

Arguments Presented:

Advocate Tanaji Londhe, representing Sharma, argued that Sharma provided financial services and received the money as a service charge, denying any intention to cheat. He stated that Sharma had been in custody since December 27, 2021, and was willing to cooperate with the investigation. He also noted that a co-accused had been granted protection from arrest by the High Court.

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) D.M. Lade, representing the State, opposed the bail, arguing that Sharma had made false representations, forged documents, and impersonated a bank official with the intent to cheat. He emphasized that the investigation was ongoing and that Sharma had received the money.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Judge Padwad reviewed the report and record, noting that Sharma had made false representations and induced the complainant to part with money. The court highlighted Sharma’s forgery of a bank guarantee draft and a fake email with stamps and seals of Alana Group Co. and State Bank of India, Fort branch, indicating a serious offense.

The court also noted that the investigation was incomplete and that Sharma had received the entire amount of money. The court identified Sharma as the main culprit and stated that his release would impede further investigation. The court also clarified that the co-accused’s protection from arrest did not benefit Sharma’s case.

Decision:

The court rejected Sharma’s bail application.

Order Details:

The order was signed and uploaded on February 11, 2022.

This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the seriousness of the offense, the forgery of documents, the ongoing investigation, and the risk of impeding the investigation if Sharma were released on bail.