IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that the applicant's continued detention was justified due to serious allegations and lack of changed circumstances warranting bail.

ORDER :

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

1. The instant bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner/applicant seeking the following reliefs:

“(a) Pass an order directing that the Petitioner (Shubham Saxena) be released on regular bail in FIR No. 144 dated 23.09.2021 registered under section 408/467/468/471/120B/201 IPC, District: South east, PS: EOW & presently pending Trial before Ld. CMM, South East District, Saket Court, New Delhi;

(b) Pass any other order/orders which this Hon'ble Court may be pleased in the facts & circumstances of the case.”

2. The brief facts that led to the filing of the present application are that the present case was registered on the complaint of M/s Eldeco Group of Companies. The complainant reported that one Mr. Shubham Saxena/applicant herein was appointed in their Accounts Department in the year 2009 and currently working as Assistant Manager (Accounts) in the said company. It is stated that during his tenure, the applicant was responsible for the preparation of cheques and processing of payments required to be made to various vendors of the company. In the first week of August, 2021, the DGM (Accounts) discovered that a vendor namely M/s Mahavir Infratech had been paid twice, i.e., Rs. 23,13,136/- on 9th July, 2021 and Rs. 17,90,310/- on 30th July, 2021. Upon seeking clarification from the applicant, he stated that he would initiate the transfer back of the said money and accordingly, these amounts were received back from M/s Mahavir Infratech.

3. Suspecting some foul play, further enquiries were made by the complainant and it was revealed that since the year 2018, the applicant had deceived the company with crores of rupees by opening fictitious accounts in the name of vendors having similar names as those of actual vendors. The same led to the registration of FIR bearing no. 0144/2021 dated 23rd September, 2021 at Police Station – Economic Offences Wing (hereinafter “EOW”) for the offences punishable under Sections 408/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

4. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested on 7th November, 2021 and is in judicial custody since then. Consequently, the applicant filed a regular bail application, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 7th

5. The investigating agency then filed a charge sheet on 4th January, 2022. The applicant again filed a bail application which was dismissed vide order dated 12th January, 2022. Another default bail application filed by the applicant was also dismissed vide order dated 13th April, 2022. Thereafter, the applicant filed another bail application which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 11th May, 2022 with liberty to file a revision petition against the order dated 13th April 2022. In view of the same, the applicant filed a revision petition bearing Crl. Revision Petition no. 196/2022 which was dismissed vide order dated 12th July, 2022. A second regular bail application was also dismissed by the Court concerned vide order dated 6th August, 2022.

6. Thereafter, the applicant filed another regular bail application before this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 9th November, 2022. Pursuant to the same, the applicant’s interim bail applications were dismissed vide order dated 12th January, 2023 and 21st January, 2023. Another interim bail application filed before this Court was also dismissed vide order dated 6th February, 2023.

7. It is stated that pursuant to the above, the applicant filed his third regular bail application before the concerned CMM which was dismissed vide order dated 28th June, 2023 and another third regular bail application was dismissed by the concerned ASJ vide order dated 25th July, 2023. Being aggrieved by the same, the applicant filed regular bail application before this Court, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 21st September, 202