2022/DHC/005873

BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022

Page 1 of 7

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

Digitally Signed

By:HARMINDER KAUR

Signing Date:30.12.2022

17:43:16

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/005873

BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022

Page 2 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securities can be withdrawn at any time by giving seven days’ notice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.

Digitally Signed

By:HARMINDER KAUR

Signing Date:30.12.2022

17:43:16

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/005873

BAIL APPLN. 3344/2022

Page 3 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 agreement