Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. The prosecution has filed the alleged bank statement of the petitioner and that of his brother which establishes that the entire allegations made by the prosecution with respect to money siphoning are false. Present is a classical example where everyone including the petitioner has been duped by the said two directors. Petitioner himself was induced by the said two directors to invest his and his family's hard earned money with SGI. Petitioner fell prey to the stratagem adopted by the said two directors. Several people were induced by the said two directors to not only invest but they in turn brought several other investors. In fact, the complainant Sunil Kumar himself was introduced by a person, namely, Vinod who had himself invested with SGI. Sunil Kumar himself introduced several other people to invest in SGI. The list of investors which has been filed along with the charge sheet will reflect that every investor has introduced other people to invest their money. The guiding greed behind these investors was that they were going to receive unprecedented return of 20% per month. When the entire criminal conspiracy hatched by the said two directors came to the knowledge of the petitioner, he lodged several complaints against the SGI and two directors. In fact, many investors have lodged complaint against Sunil Kumar wherein it was alleged that Sunil Kumar was one of the persons who introduced them to invest money with SGI. Petitioner along with 25 other investors filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. r/w Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for registration of FIR against Sunil Kumar and others including two directors. In the said complaint, the complainant Sunil Kumar filed an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed being not maintainable. However, the Court held that since the petitioner is one of the accused in the complaint lodged by Sunil Kumar, hence no direction was given in the complaint filed by him. It was further submitted that prosecution has made allegations that the petitioner has two PAN Cards. No investigation has been done by the prosecution in this respect. There was no criminal motive behind taking the second PAN Card. It was inadvertent act of third person which led to the issuance of the PAN Cards. Moreover, at best, it is an offence under the Income Tax Act for which the penalty is fine only. The petitioner did not earn any financial benefit. The complainant/investors are also responsible for the crime. They invested money in SGI without due diligence. The petitioner, who had been supporting the prosecution case throughout by lodging complaints; by moving to the Court seeking appropriate direction, has been made an accused in the present case because of faulty investigation conducted by the police. The petitioner and other persons did not receive cash or money in the form of demand draft, pay orders etc. for their alleged commission. The said two directors had crafted the concept of e-wallet. Under e-wallet scheme, the money was to be deposited in the e-account allegedly maintained in the name of these investors because they brought investment but these e wallets were never encashed and converted into actual money. The net result is that the said two directors siphoned most of the funds. It was further submitted that the charge sheet is running into more than 25000 pages with more than 2300 witnesses. The charge has yet not been framed. Hence, after framing of the charge, the trial is going to take long time. Almost a year has elapsed since the filing of the charge sheet. It will take several years to complete the trial. The petitioner is in custody since 13th May, 2013. The incarceration of the petitioner in jail is like a pre-conviction punishment with sole intention to punish the petitioner before actually being convicted. The petitioner has not tampered with evidence. He has never tried to flee from trial. He has roots in the society and is living with his family which constitutes daughter, wife and parents. The petitioner is suffering from medical problems like enlargement of liver, spinal cord pain, extremely hyper thyroid and is suffering from psychiatric disorder and has also been advised conservative treatment of his medical condition. The jail hospital is not equipped to provide proper medical care to the applicant.

7. Countering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the petitioners, Sh. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Special PP for the respondent/State submitted that accused Nitin Sinha has been continuously misleading the Court. He was not joining the investigation. Hence non-bailable warrants were issued against him. He was arrested on 30th September, 2013 in case FIR No. 152/2011 Police Station Moti Nagar and thereafter in this case on 4th October, 2013. Seeing the past conduct of the applicant and his influence, there is a great apprehension and reasonable belief that applicant shall not be available during the course of further proceedings and he shall flee from justice. It was further submitted that the accused was actively involved in the scheme of Stock Guru India as a promoter and agent and was introducing more and more people to invest in the firm. The complainant-Sunil Kumar and most of the investors in their statements named accused Nitin Sinha also who introduced them in the scheme. Prima facie, it is established that accused Nitin was an active participant in the inducement of investors into Stock Guru India and he was hand in glove with other accused. He got issued two PAN Cards by giving two different date of births, one in the name of Nitin Sinha and other in the name of Nitin Behari on the basis of forged documents. During the period of police custody remand of accused Nitin Sinha, incriminating documents and a bunch of papers pertaining to Stock Guru India, i.e., Registration Certificate (ISO Certificate), Certificate of Incorporation were recovered at his instance. It was also found that he was an initial member of Stock Guru India and has taken SGI ID Nos. 115 to 130 in his name and the name of his family members. IDs in Stock Guru India started from serial number 111 and SGI ID Nos. 111 to 114 belonged to accused Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire @ Lokeshar Dev, Raksha J. Urs @ Priyanka Saraswat Dev and their daughters. Accused Nitin earned crores of rupees by inducing general public to invest money in M/s. Stock Guru India. He got invested Rs.489 crores of innocent investors through SGI ID 115 to 130 down the line and the accused received Rs.1,02,67,189/- as commission. On 18th January, 2011, Income Tax Department conducted raid and Rs.2.93 crores were recovered from the residence of accused Nitin Sinha. Investigation revealed that there are 2,05,062 investors all over the country who have invested money in Stock Guru India and joined as member of Stock Guru India. Total amount involved in the matter is more than Rs.494 crores. More than 13,500 complaints have been received in Delhi only. As regards the delay in trial is concerned, it was submitted that the delay is not attributable to prosecution. One of the co-accused Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire @ Lokeshar Dev is delaying the trial. Till date even the scrutiny of the documents is not complete. Moreover, prosecution will be dropping certain witnesses. It was further submitted that the order passed in the bail application of Suresh Kalmadi or Sanjay Chanra are not applicable to the present case inasmuch as those cases pertains to the Government exchequer and to the policy decisions whereas present is a case where public at large has been defrauded.

8. Reliance was placed on Sunil Grover v. State, Bail Application No. 104/2012; Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI, (2013) 7 SCC 439.

9. Substantially similar pleas were taken while opposing the bail application of Naresh Kharab and it was submitted that the accused was not available for investigation as he deliberately absconded, ultimately he was arrested. Seeing his past conduct as absconder and his influence, there is grave apprehension and reasonable belief that he will not be available during the course of further proceedings and shall flee from justice. He had stated before the Income Tax Authorities that he had been working with Stock Guru India as Relationship Manager and was an agent of the firm. During the raid of Income Tax Department at his residential premises, Rs.4.88 crore have been found in cash and the same was seized from him. He got issued two PAN Cards by providing two different dates of birth, one in the name of Naresh Kumar Kharab and another in the name of Naresh Kharab. He used the forged PAN Card No.BGLPK5180R to open an account with Axis Bank and this amount was used to receive the money/commission related to the accused company-Stock Guru India. Rs.1,25,82,348/- have been credited in this account which was opened on the basis of fake PAN Card. Seven video tapes were recovered at his instance from his residential premise captioned SGI Conference which clearly reveals his involvement in the scam. It was further revealed that SGI ID 354 actually belonged to Naresh Kharab although it was in the name of his brother. Through this ID, there are 95,714 investors. The total money invested under this ID was about 248.35 crores. Accused earned crores of rupees as commission. It is an economic offence involving the huge loss of public funds and has to be viewed seriously and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the indulgence of the Court.

16. In the instant case, the petitioners are in custody for over more than 1 year. There is no evidence of the petitioners threatening the witnesses or interfering with the evidence during investigation. As regards the petitioners having two PAN Cards, it is alleged that it attracts the provisions of Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Authorities have not initiated any proceedings against the petitioners regarding two PAN Cards. The question whether the PAN Cards were obtained deliberately or it was by inadvertence is still required to be gone into during the course of trial.