Mumbai, March 12, 2024 – Abdul Wahab Mohammad Hussain has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in a cheating case involving multiple property agreements. Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Tapkire (Court Room No. 60) issued the order on March 12, 2024.

Hussain was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 611 of 2023, registered at the Parksite Police Station, for offenses under Section 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Background and Allegations:

The complainant, Tayyaba Abdul Rashid Shaikh, alleged that Hussain, claiming ownership of a room, entered into an agreement with her, accepting a substantial deposit of Rs. 3,30,000. He assured her that he would pay monthly rent for the room. However, Hussain allegedly dishonestly entered into similar agreements with Jakhiya Shaikh, Farzana Amdule, and Majar Khan, accepting large sums of money from them as well. In total, he allegedly misappropriated Rs. 12,80,000 by making false promises.

Hussain’s pre-arrest bail applications were rejected by both the Sessions Court and the High Court. He was subsequently arrested on February 23, 2024, and his bail application was rejected by the trial court.

Arguments Presented:

Advocate Ibraheem K.M., representing Hussain, argued that he was falsely implicated and that the transactions were related to a failed business finance arrangement, which should be treated as a civil matter. He also raised general grounds for bail.

Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Manisha J. Parmar, representing the State, opposed the bail, arguing that Hussain had repeatedly committed similar economic crimes. They emphasized that he had misappropriated Rs. 12,80,000 from poor individuals by making false promises of monthly rent and that sufficient documentary evidence supported the allegations. The prosecution also stated that the investigation was ongoing and that Hussain was a habitual offender.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Judge Tapkire considered the record, the submissions of both parties, and the objections raised by the prosecution. The court noted the allegations that Hussain had made false promises to the complainant and other victims regarding monthly rent payments in exchange for substantial deposits. The court also acknowledged the documentary evidence supporting these allegations.

The court highlighted Hussain’s fraudulent and dishonest intentions, his repeated rejection of bail applications, and the ongoing investigation. The court found that Hussain’s conduct and the nature of the allegations warranted a thorough investigation.

Considering the evidence, the allegations, and Hussain’s conduct, the court concluded that he did not deserve to be granted bail.

Decision:

The court rejected Hussain’s bail application.

Order Details:

The order was dictated, directly typed, and signed on March 12, 2024, and uploaded on the same day at 5:36 p.m.

This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the seriousness of the allegations, the documentary evidence, Hussain’s past conduct, and the ongoing investigation.