Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail application No. 1379/2023
FIR No. 203/21
PS EOW
State Vs. Sunita Bansal
u/s 420/406/120B IPC
04.08.2023
Present: Sh. Ashok Kumar Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Yogesh Sharma Ld. counsel for the
applicant/accused through VC.
IO SI Ganga Pal in person along-with one of the
victim Sh. Neeraj Garg.
Reply to the anticipatory bail application filed.
Arguments heard.
In the present case co-accused Mohit Bansal was
running a Talent Hub Institute being the proprietor of the same
along-with his family members i.e. her mother- applicant Sunita
Bansal and his sister co-accused Sonal Bansal and in furtherance
of criminal conspiracy, induced the general public for lucrative
returns on their investment in share market for which written
agreements were executed with the victims. Therefore, on the
allurement given by the accused persons several victims have
invested substantial amount of money with the accused persons.
They neither received any return as promised nor the money was
returned by the accused persons.
It is alleged that around Rs.2.58 crores has been
cheated by the accused persons from as many as 50 victims in
this manner. It is also submitted by the IO that investigation in
this case is still going on and there is every likelihood that
-- 1 of 3 --
: 2 :
cheated amount and number of victims may rise.
Today, in the court one of the victim namely Sh. Neeraj
Garg is present who has submitted that he has given Rs.35 lacs to
the accused persons.
So far as role of the applicant is concerned, being the
mother of the main accused Mohit Bansal, she has actively
participated in the commission of offence. Some part of the
cheated amount went into her account whereas she was assigned
the job of collecting money if the same was paid in cash. She has
been kept on similar footing with co-accused Mohit Bansal.
Ld. counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant
has been falsely implicated in this case and there is nothing
against her about her involvement in the alleged commission of
offence.
On being inquired from the IO about the return of money
to the victims, it is submitted that the entire money already been
siphoned off and no payment whatsoever has been made. On
being further inquired from the IO about requirement of custody
of the applicant/accused, it is submitted that despite issuance of
several notices u/s 41A CrPC, accused failed to join the
investigation and her custodial interrogation is required to
unearth the whole conspiracy and also for the recovery of
cheated amount. It is also submitted that in order to determine the
exact cash amount of cheated amount received by the applicant,
her custodial interrogation is necessary.
-- 2 of 3 --
: 3 :
Considering these facts and circumstances, gravity of
offence, role of the applicant and in view of the above
observations, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made
out, hence the application is dismissed. Copy of the order be
given dasti.
(Sanjay Khanagwal)
ASJ-02, NDD/PHC/New Delhi
04.08.2023
-- 3 of 3 --