The court ruled that the severity of allegations and potential for obstructing justice justified denying bail in serious fraud cases involving multiple victims.

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 charge sheet, 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 inter alia 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