The right to default bail is an indefeasible right that arises when the investigation is not completed within the prescribed statutory period, reinforcing the necessity for timely investigations.

ORDER

26.11.2024

Heard Mr. B. K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Haloi, learned Standing counsel, CBI.

2. By filing this petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 the accused- petitioner, namely, Sapnanil Das, has prayed for grant of bail in connection with CBI Case No. RC. 221/2024/E0014 (corresponding to Dispur PS Case No. 934/2024) under Section 21(1)/21(2)/21(3)/22/23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (herein after as BUDS Act) and Section 406/420 of the IPC added Section 409 of the IPC and Section 316(5) of BNS, 2023 .

3. The brief fact of the case is that on 07/08/2024, an FIR has been lodged before the Director General of Police, Assam, stating inter alia that the petitioner, who is the owner of Trading For A Living (TFAL) introduced himself to be the No. 1 trading community in Assam and promised better financial success with an assurance to provide guaranteed profit on online trading business. Accordingly, the informant joined his online classes along with other students, invested their hard earned money through online market. But the informant suffered a huge loss amounting to Rs. 24, 00,000/- by investing his money on the online market. The petitioner not only cheated the informant but also other persons and he has been running the said fraudulent business for his wrongful gain.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the TFAL is a coaching and training centre of the accused/ petitioner which is a learning platform of awareness training and guidance about stock market, index, risk management etc. The petitioner started his online trading since 2021 with his demat account through Zerodha broker app which is a online trading platform available as a mobile application and which acts as a broker for individuals willing to invest/ trade in the securities market. The accused/ petitioner had always make it clear that investing in the Securities market is subject to market risk. It is further added that initially the accused/ petitioner charged fees amounting to Rs. 6999/-. Subsequently, he increased the charge for the online classes to Rs. 10,030/- and offline classes for Rs. 24, 780/- for each session. Moreover, the accused/ petitioner used to pay GST and other taxes incurred from running the said classes. As such no criminality can be attributed towards the accused/ petitioner.

5. Further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there has not been any complaint from any depositor within the meaning of BUDS Act that the accused/ petitioner has received or accepted any deposit for the purpose of trading so as to come within the meaning of Unregulated Scheme. Moreover, the accounts of M/s Das Brothers as well as other accounts has already been frozen by the investigating agency and the progress of investigation would make it ample and crystal clear that there is no illegality or criminality as regards deposit made in the bank accounts.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised some issues on the contention of BUDS Act and has submitted that though assuming but not admitting the allegation of receiving deposits, the same would fall u/s 4 of BUDS Act as the Indian Stock market is ultimately a regulated deposit scheme as SEBI is the regulator and the Indian stock market represents the economy of the country. As such if any offence is committed u/s 4 of BUDS Act the same is punishable u/s 22 of the BUDS Act which is a bailable offence as per section 28 of the BUDS Act.

7. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the accused/petitioner has been languishing in judicial custody for last 83 days since his arrest on 04/09/2024