Mumbai, September 8, 2022 – Omoidada Omoragbon, a Nigerian national, has had his bail application rejected by the Sessions Court in Mumbai. Omoragbon was arrested in connection with Crime No. 1060/2022, registered at Bandra Police Station, for offenses under Sections 489B (using as genuine forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 465 (forgery), and 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code¹ (IPC).

The Allegations

According to the prosecution, Omoragbon deposited Rs. 1,28,000 in cash at Crysta Spring IVF Centre as payment for his wife’s treatment. The cash consisted of Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 500 notes. Subsequently, when the hospital deposited the cash at ICICI Bank, 58 of the Rs. 2,000 notes, totaling Rs. 1,16,000, were found to be counterfeit. The bank reported the incident to the police.

Omoragbon’s Defense and Arguments

Mr. S.S. Bhandary, representing Omoragbon, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He stated that the notes were accepted by the hospital cashier after verification and that the counterfeit notes were only detected later by a machine at the bank. He argued that the police had not properly investigated the staff at the hospital and the bank and that the notes were in their possession for several days before being deposited. He also cited a judgment from the Bombay High Court in a narcotics case, arguing for parity.

Prosecution’s Objections

Mr. S.V. Keknis, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), opposed the bail application. He stated that during the investigation, the name of an absconding co-accused, Bulket, was revealed. He argued that Omoragbon and Bulket had colluded to produce counterfeit Indian currency to cheat the Indian government.

Court’s Observations and Decision

Additional Sessions Judge C.V. Patil considered the submissions and the documents on record. The court noted that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and that Omoragbon’s name was revealed during the investigation. The court also noted that Omoragbon had admitted to receiving the money from Bulket, who was using a fake Indian ID and was still absconding.

“When it is disclosed that the accused has taken amount from Bulket who has used fake ID of Indian citizen for mobile number and till now he is abscond, this prima facie chain to show involvement of accused in preparing counterfeit notes,” Judge Patil stated in the order.

The court rejected the argument that the hospital and bank staff could be involved, stating that the connection to Bulket indicated Omoragbon’s involvement. The court also emphasized the seriousness of counterfeit currency offenses and their impact on the Indian economy.

“The question of counterfeit notes directly relates to Indian economy. The accused is Nigerian. Admittedly charge­sheet is filed. When the question of counterfeit notes was disclosed the F.I.R. was reported against unknown person and name of said accused reveals during investigation conducted by I.O. and therefore it cannot be said that accused has been falsely implicated,” Judge Patil stated.

The court concluded that releasing Omoragbon, a Nigerian national, while his co-accused was absconding, would pose a risk of him tampering with evidence and absconding from India.

Order

Criminal Bail Application No. 1834/2022 was rejected.

Key Points

• Counterfeit Currency: The case involved counterfeit Indian currency notes.
• Absconding Co-Accused: The court cited the absconding co-accused, Bulket, as a reason for rejecting bail.
• Economic Impact: The court emphasized the seriousness of counterfeit currency offenses and their impact on the Indian economy.
• Foreign National: Omoragbon is a Nigerian national, which the court considered a flight risk.
• Investigation Findings: The court noted that Omoragbon’s name was revealed during the investigation, not initially.
• Cashier Verification: The defense argued that the cashier accepted the notes after verification.
• Fake ID: The absconding co-accused was using a fake Indian ID.
• Charge Sheet Filed: The charge sheet was filed, however bail was still denied.