Full Order Text
Order 1 · 18 Oct 2024 · CNR MHMM180106872024
Order Details: Bail Order Pdf Text: C. C. No. 2513 PW 2024 State Vs Hampreet Singh and anr. CNR-MHMM18-010687-2024 ORDER BELOW BAIL APPLICATION, EXH.10 1. Perused record. Heard both the sides. 2. This is an application under Section 437 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for bail, mainly on the following grounds - i. The accused are innocent and falsely implicated ii. They are in custody for sufficient time, investigation is over and charge sheet already filed. iii. Accused persons received nothing and their documents were misused by some other persons. iv. Accused No.1, is watchman and was having no knowledge of the transaction. He is illiterate and himself is victim. v. Accused No.2, is teacher and was unaware of trading, no amount has been transferred to his account. vi. There is no evidence against accused persons found during investigation. vii. Accused have no criminal antecedents, they belong to respected families and ready to remain abide by the conditions, if any, imposed, etc. 3. The Ld. A.P.P. objected to it stating that offence is serious. Amount involved is very high. Though investigation is completed the other accused persons are yet to be arrested. Vital role of accused persons transpired. There is possibility of tampering and absconding. 4. The summary of the first information report, is that informant was lured by unknown persons under the pretext of providing good returns for investment and duped for an amount of Rs.5,14,19,127/-. During investigation the connection of both the applicants transpired. Therefore, they were arrested. Now investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. The said charge sheet/record of investigation shows that for transferring some part of amount the account of applicant Mr. Humpreetsing, has been used and in his account an amount of Rs.41,44,000/- has been transferred. Then said amount was again Page - 1/3 -- 1 of 3 -- C. C. No. 2513 PW 2024 State Vs Hampreet Singh and anr. CNR-MHMM18-010687-2024 transferred to the account of other persons, who were actually involved in the act of fraud. Except this there is no role attributed to him. However, charge sheet reflects that applicant Mr. Vimalprakash, was indirectly in contact with main accused persons. He managed several bank accounts for transfer of the amounts credited by the informant. His role appears very active and he did several other acts as well for siphoning off the money. Thus, role attributed to the said applicant is comparatively serious. 5. In these background facts if we considered grounds pleaded for bail accused persons can not be said to be innocent. However, these accused persons/applicants played different role. As mentioned above the role attributed to applicant Mr. Humpreetsing, is not much serious. Except the transfer of amount of Rs.41,44,000/-, nothing attributed to him. The said amount was again transferred to third person. He is watchman and not much educated. As such it can be inferred that there is some substance in his plea of innocence. 6. He is permanent resident of Virar, Dist. Palghar and ready to remain abide by the conditions. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. Said accused is ready to remain abide by the conditions. Therefore, his bail plea can be considered. 7. However, the case of the applicant/Accused No.2, Mr. Vimalprakash, stands on different footing. He found to be directly connected with the main culprits who siphoned off an amount of Rs.5 crore plus. He did several other acts as well. Now a days cyber crimes increased tremendously and hard earned money has been taken away by defrauding innocent persons. Other persons, who are main accused, are yet to be arrested. Investigation relating to them is incomplete. Page - 2/3 -- 2 of 3 -- C. C. No. 2513 PW 2024 State Vs Hampreet Singh and anr. CNR-MHMM18-010687-2024 8. The offence is serious. There is every possibility of tampering of evidence. Therefore, the grounds pleaded, can not be said to be enough to release the present applicant on bail, his bail prayer can not be allowed. 9. In view of above discussed legal and factual aspects of the matter, following order - ORDER a. Application is partly allowed. b. Applicant/Accused No.1, Mr. Humpreetsing Davindersing Randhawa, is released on bail on his furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.30,000/-. Permission granted to furnish more than one surety for the said amount or deposit cash security in substitution of surety bond. c. He shall furnish his detail address and proof thereof. d. The bail prayer of applicant/Accused No.2, Mr. Vimalprakash Dhyanprakash Gupta, is rejected. MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT) DATE – 18.10.2024 J.M.F.C., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI Page - 3/3 -- 3 of 3 --
