Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail application no. 772/24: FIR no.72/24: PS Crime Branch
State Vs. Rakesh Mishra
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEVENDER KUMAR JANGALA,
ASJ-05, NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PHC, NEW DELHI.
Bail Application no.772/24
FIR no.72/24: PS Crime Branch
Under Section: 420/120B IPC
State Vs.Rakesh Mishra
03.06.2024
Present: Sh.Mukul Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Pramod Tyagi and Sh. S. K. Maurya, Ld.counsel for the
applicant/accused Rakesh Mishra.
SI Amit Kumar from PS Crime Branch.
This is the bail application under Section 439 Cr. PC moved on
behalf of applicant/accused Rakesh Mishra for grant of regular bail.
Reply to the bail application filed.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
Brief facts: The FIR in the present case was registered on the
complaint of Mr. Rachit Bansal with the allegations of cheating of huge
amount on the pretext of online investment and trading. It is alleged that the
accused persons after giving some online work, was asked for investment in
bitcoin trading. The accused persons forced the complainant to transfer
different amounts in different accounts on the pretext of withdrawl of huge
profit on the invested money. During the course of investigation a huge
amount of Rs.86 lacs was found to be transferred in the bank account of
Ganpati Traders owned by one Neha Jha. Upon interrogation Neha Jha
disclosed that the said account was opened on the instance of the accused
Anil Malik and accused Anil Malik further disclosed that he had handed
over the said bank account to the accused Chander Kant Sharma who further
Page no.1 of total 4
-- 1 of 4 --
Bail application no. 772/24: FIR no.72/24: PS Crime Branch
State Vs. Rakesh Mishra
disclosed that they were procuring the bank accounts on the directions of K.
K. Trivedi. Accused K. K. Trivedi disclosed that he had procured the bank
accounts on the directions of accused Kaif Ansari who further gave the bank
accounts to the present applicant/accused Rakesh Mishra.
It is argued on behalf of applicant/accused that the applicant has
been falsely roped in the present case on the disclosure of other accused
persons and nothing has been recovered from him. That the applicant has
nothing to do with the alleged offence. That other four co-accused persons
have already been released on bail. That the investigation qua the
applicant/accused is already completed and the applicant belongs to
respectable family. Therefore no useful purpose is going to be served by
keeping the applicant/accused further in JC. It is prayed that the
applicant/accused may kindly be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand bail application is strongly opposed on behalf
of state. It is argued that the complainant has been cheated a huge amount in
a pre planned manner and the applicant/accused had played active role in the
alleged conspiracy. It is prayed that the bail application may kindly be
dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made by Ld. Counsel for the
applicant/accused and Ld. Addl. PP for the state and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case a huge amount is stated to be
cheated by adopting a well planned conspiracy on the pretext of online
investment. The applicant/accused is involved in the present case on the
basis of disclosure of other accused persons as the person on whose
Page no.2 of total 4
-- 2 of 4 --
Bail application no. 772/24: FIR no.72/24: PS Crime Branch
State Vs. Rakesh Mishra
instructions the alleged bank accounts were procured. The applicant/accused
is not the prime beneficiary. Other accused carrying identical allegations has
already been released on bail.
The applicant/accused is languishing in JC since 12.04.2024
and has already undergone custodial interrogation. The applicant/accused is
not direct or prime beneficiary of the alleged crime. Investigation qua him
already complete. The material evidence is documentary in nature, which is
already in the custody of investigating agency and the complainant is also
not known to the applicant/accused, therefore, the applicant is not in a
position to tamper with evidence. In view of aforesaid and alleged role of the
applicant/accused, I am of the considered opinion that no useful purpose is
going to be served by keeping the applicant/accused further in JC for
indefinite period. The applicant/accused Rakesh Mishra is admitted to bail
on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of Ld. CMM/Ld.MM/Ld.Duty MM/Link MM
concerned and subject to the following conditions:
(a) The applicant/accused shall furnish to the Investigating
Officer/ S.H.O., a cell phone number on which the applicant may be
contacted at any time and shall ensure that the number is kept active and
switched-on at all times;
(b) The applicant/accused shall not tamper with evidence nor
otherwise indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would
prejudice the proceedings in the pending matter;
(c) The applicant/accused shall not leave the country without
prior permission of the court concerned.
Nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an
expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Page no.3 of total 4
-- 3 of 4 --
Bail application no. 772/24: FIR no.72/24: PS Crime Branch
State Vs. Rakesh Mishra
With these observations the bail applications moved on behalf
of applicant/accused Rakesh Mishra is disposed off.
Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicants/accused persons and in compliance of Sanjay Singh Vs. State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi), Writ Petition Criminal no. 974/22, copy of this
order be also sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent to convey the order
to the inmate.
(Devender Kumar Jangala)
ASJ-05, New Delhi District
PHC, New Delhi/03.06.2024
Page no.4 of total 4
-- 4 of 4 --