Grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and the accused's presence could be secured without risk of fleeing from justice or tampering with evidence.

JUDGMENT :

ANU MALHOTRA, J.

1. The applicant Gaurav Kumar seeks the grant of bail in CC No.720/2017 pending before the learned Special Judge (Companies Act) Dwarka District Courts, Delhi submitting to the effect that he has been vide the order dated 24.5.2019 of the Special Judge (Companies Act) Dwarka District Courts (the applicant arrayed as accused No.88) summoned for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 477A read with Section 120B Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under 628 of the Companies Act 1956 and under Section 448 of the Companies Act, 2013.

2. The facts as put forth through the complaint case No.720/2017 filed by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office under Section 439 read with Section 212(15) of the Companies Act, 2013 and Section 193 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 bring forth that pursuant to WP(C) No.818/2015 Ranvir Singh vs. UOI filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India pursuant to the order dated 14.12.2015 wherein it was alleged that Mohd. Iqbal, a resident of Saharanpur had :

• Amassed disproportionate assets;

• Incorporated a number of sham companies under the Companies Act, 1956, many of which have dummy directors or fictitious shareholders.

• Acquired lands & buildings in the names of these companies, using laundered money earned from illegal mining through contracts taken in the names of Companies/partnership firms owned by his family members,

investigations were made into allegations against the accused No.1 Mohd. Iqbal and others and investigation was permitted to be made and thereafter the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India vide the letter dated 8.1.2016 ordered investigation by SFIO into the affairs of the six companies owned by the accused No.1 Mohd. Iqbal and subsequently the Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered extended investigation vide the order dated 8.2.2016 qua other companies accused including accused No.1 as well and vide order dated 8.1.2016 and vide letter dated 23-24/2.2016 the Ministry of Corporate Affairs directed the SFIO to investigate into the affairs of the additional 104 companies and one LLP (Limited Liability Partnership) and on completion of the investigation the SFIO, a report dated 6.7.2017 under Section 212(12) of the Companies Act, 2013 to the Central Government vide letter dated 11.8.2017 issued necessary instructions to initiate prosecution against the accused persons. The accused No.1 to 9 were stated to be the working mind and will of the group consisting of 110 companies, one LLP, 24 partnership firms and one charitable trust. The accused No.10 to 27 were stated to be key associates and confidants of the group. The accused No.28 to 78 were stated to have held position of Directors in the said entities and the accused No.79 to 92 include statutory auditors, chartered accountants, company secretaries, self acknowledged accommodation entry operators and other professionals. Accused Nos.93 to 176 were the companies in question.

3. It has been submitted on behalf of the SFIO that during investigation it was found that in order to launder the unaccounted money generated through illegal mining, the group head set up a huge conglomerate by incorporation of large number of companies and entities, acquiring number of shell companies and formation of a family trust and it has been revealed that the unaccounted money was brought into the financial system by way of placement of funds into the banking channel, layering of such funds to multiple entities and then integrating the same into the group entities and finally utilizing the accumulated funds for acquisition of assets. The complete investigation revealed that Rs.610.30 crores was routed through 84 entities under investigation mostly non-functional and non-income generated shell companies, for acquisition of assets i.e. sugar mills, land, FDRs, mines etc. The entities are stated to have been divided int