IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 30.12.2022 + BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022 TIKA RAM KHARE ..... Applicant versus STATE OF NCT DELHI ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Applicant :Mr. Sumit R. Sharma, Mr. Sumeet Anand, Mr. Pratyush Primal & Mr. Shantanu Chauhan, Advs.

For the Respondents :Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for the State alongwith SI Amit Kumar, PS EOW CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

JUDGMENT

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

1. The present application under section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail is filed in FIR No. 4/2021, dated 11.01.2021 registered at Police Station Economic Offences Wing, under Sections 406/420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

2. The FIR was registered on a joint complaint given by Mr Gopal Krishna Handa, Smt. Neetu Handa, Sh. Pragati Kumar, Sh. Parth Kumar and Sh. Kritin Kumar who alleged that a company named M/s Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022 Page 1 of 7 Kumar Sharebrokers Ltd. (KSBL) [herein after referred as “Company”] lured and induced the complainants that they would get promised / guaranteed returns if they place a basket of securities including bonds and shares with the company for margin funding as well as to meet working capital requirements of the company.

3. It is also alleged that the Complainants were fully assured that the securities would be completely safe with the company and the same were fully backed by legal agreements and cheques of equivalent amounts as security. As per the terms of agreement, fixed guaranteed interest was to be paid to the complainants and the assurance with respect to the same was given.

4. The Complainants were further promised that the loaned securities can be withdrawn at any time by giving seven days’ notice to the company. The first agreement was executed on 06.06.2011 and thereafter 10 more agreements were executed, last agreement being executed on 17.02.2018.

5. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the applicant is 70-year-old man suffering from various age-related ailments and is in judicial custody since 14.06.2022.

6. He submits that the Applicant was a salaried director in the company and his role in the company was only limited to matters pertaining to administration, legal, business development, human resource and correspondence with different institutions. The Applicant had no role whatsoever in handling the management and day-to-day affairs of the Company especially with respect to execution of agreements with the Complainants.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022 Page 2 of 7

7. He submits that in the present case the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He states that the perusal of the chargesheet clearly shows that the alleged dispute is vis-à-vis breach of contract and the same is purely civil in nature and the company had regularly been paying the interest for the year 2011 to 2018. He further disputes the allegation of luring the complainants and has placed reliance on the Emails and What’s app chats between the company and the complainants which are annexed as Annexure E &

Annexure F.

8. He further submits that the complainant has not disclosed the fact that they have received an amount of more than Rs.10 Crores as interests from the years 2010 to 2018.

9. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the present application and has filed status report.

10. She submits that the complainants had executed agreements and loaned their shares and bonds which had a value of Rs. 16,74,76,043/- and it was mentioned in the agreements, that the loaned securities would be used as margin by the company in its trading activities and must remain intact/ secure.

11. She submits that the accused company had issued security cheques of Rs. 27 Crores approx. which is equivalent to the amount against loaned securities and these cheques were issued by the alleged directors namely Tika Ram Khare (p