Mumbai, December 1, 2022 – In a ruling that considered the submission of the charge sheet and the progress of the investigation, the Designated Court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act granted bail to Shani @ Shanikumar Hanumant Ingle in connection with a case registered at Bandra Police Station (C.R. No. 110/2022). The court imposed stringent conditions to address the concerns of the prosecution and the intervenor.
Background of the Case:
Shani @ Shanikumar Hanumant Ingle, a 32-year-old businessman from Khar (West), was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 420 (cheating) read with 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code1 (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the MPID Act. The prosecution alleged that Ingle, along with other accused, induced investors to invest in a gold purchase and sale business promising high returns, and then misappropriated the invested funds.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Sanket Thange, representing Ingle, argued that his client was arrested on March 23, 2022, and the charge sheet had been submitted on June 28, 2022. He contended that the allegations against Ingle were unsustainable and unbelievable, and that the offense under the MPID Act was not prima facie constituted. He emphasized that Ingle had cooperated with the investigation and nothing was to be recovered from him.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Malankar, representing the State, and Advocate Abhijeet Gosavi, representing the intervenor Shashikumar Rajaram Bhujbal, strongly opposed the bail application. They argued that Ingle was involved in a large-scale fraud involving Rs. 7.4 crores, that he was a history sheeter, and that the investigation was still ongoing. They also alleged that Ingle had threatened and pressurized investors.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge S.M. Tapkire, after reviewing the application and the arguments, noted that the charge sheet had been submitted and that Ingle had been in custody since March 23, 2022. He also considered the allegations of the intervenor that Ingle and his associates had misappropriated Rs. 1.72 crores.
The court noted that the bail pleas of other accused, Kalpana Ingle and Santosh Ingle, had been rejected earlier on the ground that the investigation was incomplete and other accused were yet to be arrested. However, the court observed that the charge sheet had now been submitted against the arrested accused.
“Furthermore, considering the entire record, prima facie inclined the substantial material, allegations are just raised against the accused No.1 Santosh Ingle,” Judge Tapkire stated in his order. “Against the present applicant just alleged that he has purchased the gold from alleged the investment amount in all of Rs.79 Lacs, except that no any seriously considerable, cognizable allegations have been raised against him.”
The court also noted that the investigation agency had seized properties and frozen bank accounts.
“By it prima facie transpired the substantial material, relevant fact and circumstances are already investigated,” the judge observed. “However as the certain accused are yet to be arrested and detected, thereby certain inevitable time would required to complete the entire investigation and submit the final charge sheet against all the accused.”
Considering these factors, the court decided to grant bail to Ingle, but imposed stringent conditions.
Consequently, the court granted bail to Shani @ Shanikumar Hanumant Ingle, ordering his release upon furnishing a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with one or two solvent sureties of the same amount.
The court imposed several conditions, including that Ingle must not tamper with witnesses or evidence, must cooperate with the investigation, must not leave India without permission, must report to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) every Wednesday, must not engage in criminal activity, must deposit his passport, must not alienate any property, and must provide his address and contact details.
Implications and Significance:
This ruling highlights the court’s consideration of the progress of the investigation and the submission of the charge sheet in MPID Act cases. The decision underscores that while the court recognizes the seriousness of economic offenses, it also balances the rights of the accused with the need to ensure a fair trial.
The imposition of stringent conditions reflects the court’s effort to mitigate potential risks, such as flight risk and witness tampering, while upholding the principle of individual liberty.
The order was dictated and pronounced on November 28, 2022, and signed and uploaded on December 1, 2022, at 3:16 a.m.