SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Sarang V. Kotwal, J.
Kailash Shreeram Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1124 of 2019; With Criminal Application No. 815 of 2019 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1124 of 2019; With Criminal Application No. 1024 of 2019 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1124 of 2019
Decided On : 18-01-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Rizwan Merchant a/w. Mr. Kiran Jain a/w. Ish Jain a/w. Kush Dhawan i/b. Kiran Jain & Co., for the Appellant; Mr. Pradeep Gharat, Spl. P.P. a/w. Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the Respondent.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the investments made in the case fell within the definition of 'deposit' under section 2(c)(i) of the MPID Act, and that the accused had committed serious criminal offenses by making false inducements and misappropriating a huge amount of money.

Headnote:

MPID Act - Financial Fraud - Indian Penal Code, MPID Act - 409, 420, 120B, 3 - The court rejected the anticipatory bail application, ruling that the investments made in the case fell within the definition of 'deposit' under section 2(c)(i) of the MPID Act. The court found that the accused had made false inducements and misappropriated a huge amount of money, leading to serious criminal offenses.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought anticipatory bail in connection with a financial fraud case involving sections 409, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1991 (MPID Act). The FIR alleged that the accused made false inducements, misappropriated investments, and cheated investors to the tune of Rs.7,14,75,000.

Finding of the Court:

The court rejected the anticipatory bail application, stating that the investments made in the case fell within the definition of 'deposit' under section 2(c)(i) of the MPID Act. The court found that the accused had made false inducements and misappropriated a huge amount of money, leading to serious criminal offenses. The court also ruled that custodial interrogation of the applicant was necessary to investigate the money transactions and the whereabouts of the misappropriated funds.

Issues: The issues involved false inducements, misappropriation of investments, and the applicability of the MPID Act and the Indian Penal Code to the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the investments made in the case fell within the definition of 'deposit' under section 2(c)(i) of the MPID Act, and that the accused had made false inducements and misappropriated a huge amount of money, leading to serious criminal offenses.

Final Decision: The court rejected the anticipatory bail application and extended the interim order in the applicant's favor for a period of two weeks.

JUDGMENT

Sarang V. Kotwal, J. - Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R. No. 79 of 2019 registered with Byculla Police Station, Mumbai under sections 409, 420, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1991 (MPID Act).

2. The FIR is lodged by one Dilipkumar Nagpal. He has stated that he and his brother were having business of financial consultancy. In the year 2010, the informant got acquainted with one Sachin Wagh, who in turn, informed the informant about the business of M/s. Varun Industries Ltd. and M/s. Varun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. The informant was told that Varun Industries was a listed company and the prospect of the comapny was very good. Sachin told the informant that the companies wanted to expand their business and they were in need of financial assistance and for that purpose they were accepting the investments from the investors and were offering attractive interest rate on the investments. The informant showed his interest. Accordingly, a meeting was arranged. The FIR mentions that the informant met the present Applicant in the companies' office at Byculla. The informant went there on 17th June, 2010 at about 2.00 p.m. The Applicant was introduced to one Kiran Kumar Mehta as the chairman and managing director and the present applicant was introduced to the informant as the joint managing director of the company. Other persons were introduced as other directors of these companies. The present applicant and Kiran Kumar Mehta showed balance-sheet of the company to the informant. Both of them represented to the informant that their company was in the business of steel industry and they had business of uranium mines in Madagascar and they had business in diamonds and petroleum and that they wanted to expand their business and for that purpose, they were in dire need of finance. They further told the informant that they were accepting the money from the investors and were offering attractive rate of interest on the investments. They told that the company had steel sheet factories at Jodhpur, Vasai and Palghar. He was told that they had firms in Rajasthan and Tamilnadu. They told that they also had pressure cooker factory at Nasik, Petrol mines in Karnataka. They further represented that their Petrol and Gas division office was in Govandi. Similarly, the companies were dealing in diamonds in foreign countries. The informant was impressed and he decided to invest money in those companies. The informant was informed that there were 60 to 70 investors in the companies. The Informant was appointed as a Financial Broker for both the companies. Board resolutions were passed to that effect to appoint the informant as the financial broker.

3. The Applicant and Kiran Kumar Mehta asked the informant to bring the investments from the investors. They had offered the interst at the rate of 18% per annum to the investors. The investors were given the bills of exchange and post-dated cheques as a security. The informant and his brother invested their peronsal money. They were to get 3% commission on investments and 5% incentive, if the turnover increased. The informant brought 54 persons/investors, who had deposited funds in M/s. Varun Industries Ltd. and 51 depositors who deposited funds in M/s. Varun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. The FIR mentions that the bills of exchange and post-dated cheques were signed by Kiran Kumar Mehta and the present Applicant. The accused paid regular interest to their depositors between June 2010 to April, 2013 and after that they did not pay anything. The investments were not returned. The post-dated cheques were not honoured. The investors filed proceedings under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Thus the Informant and the other investors were cheated to the tune of Rs.7,14,75,000/-. On these allegations, the FIR is lodged.

4. Heard Mr. Rizwan Merchant, learned counsel for the Applicant,

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top