Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Applicant in Cheating and Deposit Fraud Case — Applicant Not Named in FIR, No Prima Facie Evidence of Criminal Conspiracy. Court held that mere suspicion without material evidence cannot justify continued detention under Sections 420, 406, 427, 34, 120-B IPC and Sections 3, 4 of MPID Act.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 6
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Sandip Chintaman Samant, filed a bail application under the Bombay High Court's Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction seeking release in connection with C.R. No.77 of 2023 registered at Thane Police Station. The FIR was lodged on 4th March 2023 for offences under Sections 420, 406, 427, 34, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act). The prosecution alleged that the applicant was involved in a conspiracy to cheat depositors. However, the applicant was not named in the FIR, and the investigation did not reveal any prima facie evidence of his involvement in the conspiracy or receipt of deposits. The court, presided over by Dr. Neela Gokhale J., considered the submissions of the applicant's counsel, Mr. Satyavrat Joshi with Samay Pawar, and the respondent's counsel, Ms. Megha S. Bajoria. The court noted that the applicant had been in custody since his arrest and that the investigation was complete. The court held that mere suspicion without material evidence cannot justify continued detention. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application and directed the applicant's release on bail subject to conditions.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Bail - Prima Facie Case - Sections 420, 406, 427, 34, 120-B IPC and Sections 3, 4 MPID Act - Applicant not named in FIR; no evidence of conspiracy or receipt of deposits - Held that mere suspicion without material evidence cannot justify continued detention (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving cheating, criminal breach of trust, and offences under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999, when he is not named in the FIR and there is no prima facie evidence of his involvement in the alleged conspiracy.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail subject to conditions.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Prima Facie Case
  • Criminal Conspiracy
  • MPID Act
  • IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (09) 80

Bail Application No.4116 of 2024

2025-09-22

Dr. Neela Gokhale J.

2025:BHC-AS:39748

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w Samay Pawar, for the Applicant; Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, for the Respondent

Sandip Chintaman Samant

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Bail application in a criminal case involving cheating, criminal breach of trust, and offences under the MPID Act.

Remedy Sought

The applicant sought release on bail in connection with C.R. No.77 of 2023.

Filing Reason

The applicant was arrested in connection with an FIR alleging cheating and deposit fraud; he claimed he was not named in the FIR and there was no evidence against him.

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail when he is not named in the FIR and there is no prima facie evidence of his involvement in the alleged conspiracy.

Submissions/Arguments

The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant was not named in the FIR and there was no evidence of his involvement in the conspiracy or receipt of deposits. The respondent's counsel opposed the bail application, but the court found no material evidence against the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

Mere suspicion without material evidence cannot justify continued detention; bail should be granted when the applicant is not named in the FIR and there is no prima facie evidence of involvement in the alleged conspiracy.

Judgment Excerpts

The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No.77 of 2023 dated 4th March, 2023 registered with Police Station, Thane for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 427, 34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

Procedural History

The applicant filed a bail application under the Bombay High Court's Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction. The court reserved the order on 9th September 2025 and pronounced it on 22nd September 2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 420, 406, 427, 34, 120-B
  • Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999: 3, 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Criminal Proceedings for Offence Under Section 201 IPC — Acts of Removing Noose and Shifting Body After Suicide Do Not Constitute Destruction of Evidence. The court held that the essential ingredients of Section 201 ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Employee's Petition Challenging Departmental Inquiry During Pendency of Criminal Case. Held that departmental inquiry can proceed simultaneously with criminal trial as standards of proof differ, and no automatic stay arise...