The gravity and implications of the offence, along with the petitioner's willingness to repay the investors, are crucial factors in determining the eligibility for bail.

V.K. Shali, J.

1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

2. The facts of the case are that one Salim Khan, who was one of the investors, was duped by the accused persons on seeing an advertisement published by RKG Trade for Profit in The Economic Times of April, 2009. On seeing the said advertisement, he went to the office of the accused persons, where he met both the accused and his father. They told him that their company, RKG Trade for Profit was a member of Multi Commodity Exchange of India Ltd. Both asked Salim Khan to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- which would fetch an interest @ 7% per month. An agreement to that effect was entered into between the parties. Salim Khan deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- through cheque in May, 2009 in the office of the accused persons. The accused persons managed the portfolio of Salim Khan. Whenever he met the accused persons, he was given assurances and was persuaded to deposit further amounts of money. He was swayed by these assurances and his father also deposited a sum of Rs. 5,30,000/- with the office of the accused. Till December 2009, the complainant received the payments through cheques. However, the cheque for the month of January, 2010 had bounced and thereafter the money was not paid. The accused persons had allegedly closed their office and ran away.

3. On the basis of this statement of the complainant, an FIR was registered for cheating and various other offences. During the course of interrogation of the accused, computers and other material of the accused persons were seized. The investigation of this case was transferred to EOW Cell (Crime Branch) on 8.5.2010 and thereafter, a number of persons came forward and made allegations against the accused. About 188 complaints had been made by the investors who had purportedly been duped by the accused persons for more than Rs.1,00,00,000/-. The Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. shows that more than 1500 investors had invested approximately Rs.30,00,00,000/- in the concern of the accused persons.

4. The petitioner had filed repeated bail applications before the Court below which did not yield any result, after which the petitioner’s bail application was rejected by Mr. H.S. Sharma, the learned ASJ on 17.1.2012, whereupon the present bail application has been filed.

5. The present bail application was listed before the High Court on 24.1.2012 and vide order dated 27.1.2012, this Court had granted interim bail to the petitioner, in the interest of investors, on his furnishing a Personal Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, subject to the condition that he shall dispose of his property i.e. space in a Mall at Gurgaon (Haryana) owned by him, by way of a public auction and deposit the transaction amount by a demand draft and not by cash. The said order reads as under:-

“Crl.M.A. No. 959/2012 (Exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 104/2012

Consequent to order dated 24th January, 2012, the father of the petitioner is present in the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from the father of the petitioner, submits that he shall execute all the documents which are required for disposal of the property, to the petitioner, thereafter, he would dispose of the property i.e., the Mall at Gurgaon (Haryana) and deposit the entire amount in the form of FDR.

2. Learned APP on the other hand submits that the claimants are 822 and the total claim is more than Rs.22 Crore. Therefore, until and unless the petitioner gives an advertisement in a paper to sell the aforesaid property by way of demand draft (no cash transaction).

3. Keeping the welfare of the investors into view and in the interest of justice, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1 lac with two sureties of the like amount to the s