Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Yogesh Khanna, J.
Aunirban Saha - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Bail Application No. 2100 of 2021
Decided On : 22-10-2021
Regular Bail - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 439 - IPC 420, IPC 406, IPC 120B - Summary: The court dismissed the petition for regular bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Sections 420, 406, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The court considered the gravity of the accusations, the large magnitude of money involved, and the impact on the trust of the criminal justice system. It also noted the likelihood of tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and fleeing from justice. The court highlighted the petitioner's alleged collusion and failure to cooperate during the investigation, leading to the dismissal of the bail application.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 420, 406, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was alleged to have siphoned off funds from investors and duped numerous home buyers. The petitioner's conduct during the investigation, including alleged collusion and failure to cooperate, was also highlighted.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition for regular bail, citing the serious nature of the accusations, the impact on the trust of the criminal justice system, and the likelihood of tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and fleeing from justice.
Issues: The issues revolved around the gravity of the accusations, the large magnitude of money involved, the impact on the trust of the criminal justice system, the likelihood of tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and fleeing from justice, as well as the petitioner's alleged collusion and failure to cooperate during the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the accusations, the impact on the trust of the criminal justice system, and the likelihood of tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and fleeing from justice. The petitioner's alleged collusion and failure to cooperate during the investigation also played a significant role in the court's decision.
Final Decision: The petition for regular bail was dismissed, and any pending application was also disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Yogesh Khanna, J. - This petition is filed under Section 439 Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred as Cr P C) for regular bail to petitioner in case FIR No.103/2019 registered under Section 420/406/120B IPC at police station Economic Offence Wing.
2. This order be read in continuation of earlier order dated 27.09.2021. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner argued an inquiry was initiated on a complaint dated 05.02.2019 against the petitioner. On 11.06.2019 the present FIR was registered. On 09.12.2020 the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody since 12.12.2020. The charge sheet was filed on 03.02.2021; cognizance taken on 06.02.2021; the IRP has since been appointed and even NCLT Court constituted the Committee of Creditors; and bids are being invited to take up construction of the flats.
3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner urged since January 2021 the investigation is complete and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. The extent of construction done by the petitioner, as mentioned in the chargesheet, is as under:-
The project 'Amadeus' comprises three (3) Towers of 35 floors each with total 330 high-end flats/apartments. The substantial portion of construction has been done on the aforesaid project and the physical progress of the construction till date is as follows:-
a) Tower A - Structure completed up to 21 floors with 14 floors remaining
b) Tower B - Structure completed up to 19 floors with 16 floors remaining
c) Tower C - Structure completed upto 24 floors with 11 floors remaining
Out of total 330 flats only 266 flats have been booked/ sold to various buyers so far.
4. The photographs are annexed.
5. It is argued the petitioner company had taken loan from two companies of USA for construction and amounts were repaid to those companies, which the prosecution alleges to have been siphoned off. It is alleged there is no allegation of tampering with evidence.
6. The State filed its status report stating interalia the petitioner herein was a director of the company and an authorised signatory of its bank accounts wherein the amounts received from the investors were deposited. Many more complaints have been received with same allegations against the petitioner and his company and it is alleged all accused persons used the funds of complainant and other investors to develop their personal Real Estate Projects, other than the one offered. It is alleged by adopting this modus operandi, the petitioner siphoned off the funds of complainants in his other companies.
7. The petitioner is involved in five cases of NI Act and three other FIRs of similar nature are still pending investigation. The petitioner alongwith his accomplices had duped numerous home buyers and had divested them off their life time savings and it is alleged there is every possibility in case he is admitted to bail, he may tamper with the evidence and may influence the witnesses and even abscond to avoid legal proceedings.
8. It is alleged there are false averments made in the bail application to the effect there is only one complainant in the FIR; rather it is a multi-victim FIR and though the complainant is projected to be a speculative investor alleging due to fall in the real estate market the petitioner had suffered losses, but the case is otherwise. It is alleged the petitioner even took time to settle the matter with complainant(s), but then did not come forward.
9. Heard.
10. The allegations are petitioner was taking active role in the development of the project and have been signing allotment letters for and on behalf of the accused company. Further he did not cooperate with the police nor provided requisite documents and rather changed the registered office of the company. The petitioner was arrested on 09.12.2020 after issuance of NBWs. A press statement dated 11.02.2020 was issued by the Delhi Police on its official website stating interalia sincere efforts were made to arrest the accu
The court emphasized the seriousness of the accusations, the impact on the trust of the criminal justice system, and the likelihood of tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and fleeing from....
The court ruled that the severity of allegations and potential for obstructing justice justified denying bail in serious fraud cases involving multiple victims.
Point of Law : Inducement to customers - Bail granted - Admittedly, there is no allegation/proof of siphoning off of funds against him and as alleged he was not a signatory of bank account of company....
The court considered the duration of custody, the nature of the offences, and the accused's cooperation in proposing schemes to revive the projects as key factors in granting bail in economic offence....
Serious allegations of fraud and misappropriation justify denial of bail; medical concerns do not outweigh risk factors associated with the case.
The main legal point established is that an accused charged under a non-bailable offense, but with a compoundable nature and a maximum punishment of 3 years, may be granted bail after considering fac....
The right to speedy trial, the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and the consideration of the approval of the Resolution Plan in the context of the accused's lack of control ....
Bail can be granted based on the petitioner's intention to settle, deposit of principal amount, and the circumstances of the case.
The severity of economic offences and the impact on the economy warrant a different approach in the matter of bail, as cautioned by the Supreme Court.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
