Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rupesh Rai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 July, 2019
1 M.Cr.C.No.8449 of 2019
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J.
Misc. Criminal Case No.8449/2019
Rupesh Rai & Anr.
vs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Pawan Gujar, counsel
for the applicants.
Shri Satyendra Jyotishi, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Shri Asheesh Poddar and Tony Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the
objector.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
Reserved on : 25/07/2019 Delivered on : 29/07/2019 This is first application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. as the applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.20/2018 registered at Police Station S.T.F., Bhopal, District-Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and under Section 66-D of the I.T. Act.
2. As per the prosecution case, applicants Rupesh Rai and Brajesh Raikwar who were the business head for the marketing of a cryptocurrency Plus Gold Union Coin (PGUC) in India, by organizing seminars in hotels in many cities of India, publishing booklets and through the website assured complainants and other innocent investors that on purchasing the coin they would get guaranteed handsome returns within a certain period (at the time Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2019.08.01 11:38:24 +05'30' 2 M.Cr.C.No.8449 of 2019 of maturity) thereby inducing the complainants and other innocent investors to invest the money in the scheme and took crores of rupees from innocent investors. Thereafter under a pre-calibrated move, they started to lower down the price of that coin and lastly at the time of maturity, the value of the coin became zero. Thus they committed fraud with the complainant and other innocent investors and embezzled their amount.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is further submitted that the applicants never instigated the complainants and other persons to invest their amount in Plus Gold Union Coin (PGUC). The complainants and other persons had invested at their own with the hope to get huge benefit in the scheme. The present applicant has nothing to do with the same and he has not received any amount invested by the complainants and other persons in the scheme. Some of the complainants had also visited the Directors of the company in Hongkong and gathered information regarding investment with the Company and benefits therefrom. Only then they invested the amount in the scheme and also instigated other persons to invest their money in the scheme and also took an active part in the promotional seminars of that scheme too. Earlier, complainants earned huge profit from their investment, thereafter they themselves reinvested their amount in the scheme but in the second time, they suffered losses and wrongly lodged report against the applicants. The present applicants have no concern with the alleged investment of the complainants. Applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai is ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. In the event of arrest, his reputation will be ruined. Under these circumstances, applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai prays for anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State as well as objectors opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicants Rupesh Rai and Brajesh Rai by giving false assurance to complainants and other innocent investors that they would get guaranteed handsome return within a certain period (at the time of maturity) on purchasing that coin induced the complainants and other innocent investors to invest the money in the scheme and took crores of Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2019.08.01 11:38:40 +05'30' 3 M.Cr.C.No.8449 of 2019 rupees from innocent investors and embezzled that amount. So applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai should not be released on anticipatory bail.
5. Although it is alleged that some complainants had also visited the Directors of the company in Hongkong and after gathering information regarding investment with the Company and benefits therefrom they invested the amount in the scheme besides inducing other persons to invest their money in the scheme and also took an active part in the promotional seminars of that scheme and earlier, some of the complainants also earned profits from their investment, but it also alleged that besides the complainants applicants also duped other innocent investors to invest the money in the scheme and took crores of rupees from innocent investors and embezzled that amount. So looking to the enormity of fraud this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant No.1 Rupesh Rai.
6. Hence, this application is rejected.
(Rajeev Kumar Dubey) Judge vs Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2019.08.01 11:38:52 +05'30'