SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(HP) 9953

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Sushil Kukreja, J
Vijay Kumar Juneja – Appellant
Versus
State Of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No. 1799 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ajay Kochhar, Varun Chauhan, Anubhav Chopra
For the Respondents: Anup Rattan, Dalip K. Sharma, Raj Negi, Swati Draik, Rajat Chaudhary

Anticipatory bail in cases of grave economic offences involving deep-rooted conspiracies and large-scale public fund loss should be exercised sparingly; custodial interrogation is essential when investigation is in progress to unearth money trails, and such relief should be denied if it hampers fair investigation or poses a flight risk.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Anticipatory bail - Economic offences - Nature and gravity - Larger public interest - Petitioner accused of involvement in crypto currency fraud amounting to Rs.18 crores - Investigating agency requires custody for discovery of trail and recovery of agreements - Held, considering the serious nature of economic offences involving public funds, discretionary power under S.482 BNSS must be exercised sparingly - Application dismissed. (Paras 6, 15, 24, 25)

(B) Economic Offences - Grant of bail - Principles reiterated - Economic offences affect national economy and financial health of the country - Accused not entitled to anticipatory bail as a matter of right - Investigation must be granted freedom where custodial interrogation is necessary for discovery of facts and proceeds of crime. (Paras 16-23)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving a massive crypto currency fraud. Investigations revealed that the petitioner facilitated investments through fraudulent websites, managed multiple bank accounts with high-volume transactions, and used proceeds from the crime to acquire real estate properties, often under aliases or in the names of domestics and family members. It was alleged that the petitioner did not cooperate during the interim bail period and was actively concealing assets and money trails.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the petitioner is prima facie involved in a deep-rooted economic conspiracy involving significant sums of money. Given that the main accused has absconded and the petitioner failed to cooperate with the ongoing investigation, custodial interrogation is deemed essential for the effective detection of the money trail and to prevent tampering of evidence or flight risk.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in an economic offence of significant magnitude involving public funds and ongoing investigation requirements.

Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail in economic offences must be exercised sparingly, especially when the accused's custodial presence is required to facilitate a systematic investigation and prevent the destruction of financial evidence that impacts the larger public interest.

Result: Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of bail application facts and rival contentions regarding crypto fraud. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. court's findings on prima facie evidence and the nature of economic offenses. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
3. legal precedents establishing stringent standards for bail in economic offences. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
4. conclusion denying anticipatory bail due to investigation requirements and public interest. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)

Sushil Kukreja, Judge

The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short BNSS) for releasing him on bail in case FIR No. 120 of 2023, dated 24.09.2023, under Sections 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code (for short IPC), read with Section 59 of the HP Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 199 and Sections 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, registered at Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

2. The facts of the case, which emerge from the record, are encapsulated as under:

2(a). On 24.09.2023 on the basis of the complaint made by Shri Arun Singh Guleria (complainant) a case was registered at Palampur Police Station, District Kangra, H.P. As per the complainant, on the advice of Subhash Sharma, resident of Mandi, H.P., they had invested in a website, i.e., www.voscrow.10, which was owned by the above said Subhash Sharma alongwith one Milan Garg, resident of Meerut, U.P. In lieu of their investments, virtual currency was provided through the website. The complainant further alleged that above said Subhash Sharma alongwith promoters Sukh Dev Thakur and Abhishek Sharma, who are residents of Mandi and Una, respectively, allegedly cheated the general public through websites like Voscrow and Hypenext.

2(b). The complainant further alleged that during the period between 2019 to 2020, the above persons, promised the individuals to double their money and such promises continued till 2021 and during this period, some individuals received distributions of funds against their investments and this led to increase in investments. Resultantly, many people invested and on 25th December allocations were halted by Subhash Sharma and later he assured that allocations would resume soon. Subsequently, Subhash Sharma tied up with Hypenext, which was owned by Milan Garg of Meerut. On being persuaded, the people invested and reinvested in Hypenext again and people also received partial funds against their investments and such practice continued till 2022. Thereafter, the company declared inability to provide returns due to technical problems requesting five months’ time for payment and qua this both Subhash Sharma and Milan Garg informed the entire community through a video. In total, the amount involved was rupees eighteen crores and they acknowledged and promised to activate new IDs on 8th August, 2023 at Aglobal.io, however, as per the complainant neither his community nor he received any money. The complainant alleged that Subhash Sharma, Hemraj, Milan Garg, Sukhdev Thakur and Abhishek Sharma defrauded the people by creating fake website and it was a well-planned conspiracy.

2(c). As per the FIR, the above said persons were involved in fraudulent activities related to crypto currency and they enticed the people to invest substantial amount(s), promising high returns, which resulted in a collective loss of eighteen crore rupees to the complainant and his associates. On 26.09.2023 a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted, which was headed by DIG of Northern Range, Dharamshala, for investigating various crypto currency related fraud cases across the State.

2(d). It was unearthed that the modus operandi of the alleged fraud involved alluring individuals with promise of high returns on crypto currency investments, creating a network of investors, who recruited others, manipulating crypto currency prices and ultimately cau

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top