Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Pratap Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 January, 2022
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 MCRC-60144-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC No. 60144 of 2021
(RAHUL PRATAP SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 05-01-2022
Shri Navneet Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Abhay Raj Singh Chouhan, learned PL for the respondent/State.
Shri Shesh Narayan Dubey, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Gorakhpur, District-Jabalpur is present in person.
Heard with the aid of a case diary.
This is the first application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant Rahul Pratap Singh was arrested on 30/11/2021 in connection with Crime No.682/2021 registered at Police Station Gorakhpur, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 465, 468, 420/34 of the IPC, Sections 21(1), 23 of Irregular Deposit Scheme Ban Act and Section 6(1) of Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000.
As per prosecution case, on 19/11/2021, during area petrolling at around 7 pm sub-inspector, K.S. Dubey police station, Gorakhpur received secret information that some person were trying to cheat people in Choti Line Chowk by luring them to invest money in the share market. At around 9:00 pm, Basant Kumar came to the police station and informed him that some people were distributing blue and yellow pamphlets near the vegetable market in Chhoti Line Chowk and they were promising to pay an interest of 5% per month on deposit of money in their office and that money will be invested in the stock market and commodity market. On that ASI Santosh Rai and constable Ratnesh Rai went to the spot and took Anuj Singh, Sachin Raj and Richest robot to the police station Gorakhpur. The yellow and blue pamphlets were found with them. On interrogation they informed the police that they work as commission agents for RPS Group and they lured the people to deposit money with the Group on the pretext that investors would Signature Not Verified SAN get an interest of 5% per month on the money deposited with the company.
Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.01.07 18:44:50 IST2 MCRC-60144-2021 That money would be invested in the share market and commodity market. They did not open Demat accounts of investors and fraudulently took money from innocent people. On that Sub Inspector, Gorakhpur registered the Crime No.682/2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 420/34 of the IPC, Sections 21(1), 23 of Irregular Deposit Scheme Ban Act and Section 6(1) of Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 and investigated the matter. During investigation it was found that RPS Capital Company is run by RPS INDIAMART (OPC) PVT. LTD. Promoted by RPS INDIA GROUP and they took money from innocent people alluring them that their money would be invested in share market and commodity market in lieu of that they would give cheques to the investors, and that they are collecting money from people without any authority. It was also found that RPS Capital has no legal permission to collect the money from any person for investment still applicant Rahul Pratap Singh himself is collecting money from innocent people by issuing receipts and invested that amount in share market under his name through Zerodha Brokerage Company and it was also found that applicant Rahul Pratap Singh has collected Rs.73,50,000/- from the innocent investors. On that police arrested the applicant and co- accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. RPS Capital Company was registered under the Company Act and applicant has permission to collect the money from investors. He collected money for investing it in the share market for which the applicant is entitled. Nobody has lodged a report against the applicant that he had cheated them or did not return the amount due to them, so no offence under Section 465, 420,409 of the IPC is made out against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal past. He has been in custody since 30/11/2021 and the conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.01.07 18:44:50 IST 3 MCRC-60144-2021 submitted that the applicant collected money from the innocent investors on the pretext that they would get 5% interest per month on that deposit, while the applicant has no permission from the Reserve Bank of India to take deposits from the investors. In the reply to the notice given by the Investigation Officer, the applicant himself admitted that he has not taken any permission from SEBI regarding getting deposits from the investors and he did not open any Demat account in the name of the company. Even in the certification of incorporation of RPS INDIAMART (OPC) PVT. LTD it is mentioned that the certificate is neither a licence nor permission to conduct the business for solicit deposits or funds from the public, which clearly shows that the applicant without getting any permission from the authorities took deposits from innocent investors and violated the provisions of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, and the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. Hence, prima facie offence under Section 21/23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 and provisions of Section 15(b) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 is made out against the applicant, which is not bailable. The investigation of crime is going on, so the applicant should not be released on bail.
Looking to the contention of the learned counsel of the state, and the fact that in the certification of incorporation of the company filed by the applicant himself alongwith his bail application, it is clearly mentioned that the applicant has no permission to take deposits or funds from the public, which clearly shows that the applicant without any valid permission took deposits from the innocent investors in this regard investigation is going on, so this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage.
Hence, this application is rejected.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE VS Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.01.07 18:44:50 IST