JUDGMENT

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.

1. These are the petitions filed by the petitioner under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 295/2017 in Bail Application 1768/2021 and FIR No. 296/2017 in Bail Application 2476/2021 under sections 409/420/477A/120B IPC registered at P.S. - R.K. Puram.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the present FIR’s were registered on the complaint of one Raju Dudani in Bail Application 1768/2021 and Ravinder Kumar Ngapal in Bail Application 2476/2021 that 2 persons Sitaram and Abhishek of M/S Amrapali Aadya Trading and Investment Pvt. Ltd. (herein referred to as “the company”) approached the complainants in the month of February 2015 (to Raju Dudani in Bail Application 1768/2021) and in September 2016 (to Ravinder Kumar Ngapal in Bail Application 2476/2021) for opening a Demat account with the company having their offices at Somdatt Chambers 1, UG-29 Bhikajicama Place, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110066 and at 13 Vaishali, Lala Jagatnarain Marg, Pitampura Delhi 110034. They both presented that the company is leading and well-established stock brokers from last 18 years with absolutely clean antecedents and transparent dealings. They also assured the complainants that all of their equities/shares will be kept safely and securely into the Demat account, holding with the company. Thereafter, both the complainants decided to open a Demat account in the company in February

2015 and in September 2016 respectively. On behalf of the said company two persons, namely, Sitaram and Abhishek collected Power of Attorney and few documents like KYC, Holders Detail Form, Nomination Forms duly filled in by the complainants on the pretext that they are the necessary documents as per the prevailing practice for opening Demat and Trading account with the company and will be properly filed by them as per the standard obligatory requirements and these documentation once completed, will be shared in the form of a photocopied set with both the complainants. It was further represented to the complainants that all the original documents which were signed by the complainants will remain in the safe custody of the company. The Demat and Trading account of complainants were opened with the company bearings numbers DP:CDSL12059200, Demat account 00118760, Trading account number 2532 and CDSL 12059200, Demat account 00180141 and Trading account number Z90 respectively.

3. Thereafter, both the complainants requested the above said persons to give the duly verified and stamped copy of the complete set of documents but the documents received by complainants were incomplete which were neither signed nor authenticated by any official of the company. Moreover the copy of the power of attorney and other relevant documents were not supplied to the complainants despite repeated reminders but instead both the person repeatedly assured the complainants that the dealings were absolutely transparent and honest and the shares are kept in the Demat account in the safe custody of CDSL. Unsuspectingly the complainants started trade transactions with the company in respective trading accounts. After few months the complainants realised that they have no information from CDSL about shareholding in the Demat account and contacted both the said persons about this legal deficiency upon which they again assured the complainants that all the shareholding are being properly maintained. Whenever the complainants contacted the office of the company they were ensured by the regional head and other officials that their shares are being kept in Demat Account. Then the complainants made further payments through cheques on the various dates for purchasing all the equities. The complainants have shareholding amounting to Rs.35 Lacs and Rs.1.10 Crores respectively.

4. In August 2017, both the complainants requested the officials of the company to provide the statements of shareholding in CDSL, upon which they mailed the statement but there was no