Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Chit Fund Fraud Case on Grounds of Parity and Lack of Prima Facie Evidence of Cheating. Co-accused already granted bail by Sessions Court; applicants similarly placed and entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC.

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

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court considered two bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, filed by Sachin Vasant Shelar (accused no.2) and Taha Hafi Kaii (accused no.1) in connection with Crime No.I-116 of 2018 registered at Chitalsar Police Station, Thane. The FIR alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 171 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 4 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982; Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000; and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act (MPID). The case involved a chit fund scheme where the applicants were accused of cheating depositors by making false promises and misappropriating funds. The applicants were arrested on 4th June 2018 (Kaii) and 18th June 2018 (Shelar). Charge-sheet was filed on 31st June 2018 against accused nos.1 and 2, and a supplementary charge-sheet was filed on 9th October 2018 against accused no.3. The applicants sought bail primarily on the ground of parity, as co-accused Vikram Bangera had been granted bail by the Sessions Court. The State opposed bail, arguing that the applicants were involved in a large-scale fraud and that the investigation was ongoing. The court analyzed the role of the applicants, noting that the chit fund scheme was registered and that the applicants were not the masterminds. It found that the evidence did not prima facie establish cheating against the applicants. The court also considered that the applicants had been in custody for over two years, the investigation was complete, and there was no likelihood of tampering with evidence. Relying on the principle of parity, the court held that the applicants were entitled to bail, as there were no distinguishing features from the co-accused who had been granted bail. The court allowed both bail applications, directing the applicants to be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.50,000/- each with one or two sureties, and imposed conditions including not tampering with evidence, not leaving the country without permission, and attending the trial regularly.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Parity - Applicants accused of offences under IPC, Chit Funds Act, IT Act, and MPID Act - Co-accused Vikram Bangera granted bail by Sessions Court - Applicants similarly placed - Held that applicants are entitled to bail on grounds of parity, as no distinguishing features exist (Paras 10-12).

B) Chit Funds - Offences under Section 4 of Chit Funds Act, 1982 - Prima Facie Case - Allegations of fraudulent chit fund scheme - Court noted that the scheme was registered and applicants were not the masterminds - Held that prima facie case of cheating not made out against applicants (Paras 8-9).

C) Information Technology - Offence under Section 66D of IT Act, 2000 - Cheating by personation using computer resource - Allegations of fake calls and messages - Court found no direct evidence linking applicants to such acts - Held that bail cannot be denied solely on this ground (Para 9).

D) Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act - Section 3 MPID Act - Depositors' interest - Applicants in custody since June 2018 - Investigation complete - No likelihood of tampering with evidence - Held that continued detention not warranted (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicants are entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the nature of allegations, evidence on record, and parity with co-accused who have been granted bail.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both bail applications are allowed. Applicants Sachin Vasant Shelar and Taha Hafi Kaii shall be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.50,000/- each with one or two sureties. Conditions: (i) not tamper with prosecution evidence; (ii) not leave India without permission; (iii) attend trial regularly; (iv) furnish address and contact details.

Law Points

  • Bail under Section 439 CrPC
  • Parity in bail
  • Prima facie case
  • Section 4 Chit Funds Act
  • Section 66D IT Act
  • Section 3 MPID Act
  • Offences under IPC 419
  • 420
  • 406
  • 465
  • 467
  • 468
  • 471
  • 120B
  • 171
  • 34
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (BOM) (02) 39

Bail Application No.391 of 2019 and Bail Application No.223 of 2019

2021-02-08

Sandeep K. Shinde

Mr. Akhilesh Dubey with Mr. Bhushan Bankar with Mr. Uttam Dubey with Mr. Siddhesh Rajput and Mr. Varad Shivgan for applicant in BA 223 of 2019; Mr. Nitin Pradhan i/by Mr. S.D.Khot for applicant in BA 391 of 2019; Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State

Sachin Vasant Shelar and Taha Hafi Kaii

The State of Maharashtra

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail applications under Section 439 CrPC for offences including cheating, forgery, chit fund fraud, and IT Act violations.

Remedy Sought

Applicants seek bail in Crime No.I-116 of 2018 registered at Chitalsar Police Station, Thane.

Filing Reason

Applicants have been in custody since June 2018; they seek bail on grounds of parity with co-accused who was granted bail and lack of prima facie evidence.

Previous Decisions

Co-accused Vikram Bangera was granted bail by the Sessions Court. Charge-sheet filed against accused nos.1 and 2 on 31st June 2018; supplementary charge-sheet against accused no.3 on 9th October 2018.

Issues

Whether the applicants are entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC on the ground of parity with co-accused who has been granted bail? Whether the allegations prima facie constitute the offences alleged, particularly cheating under IPC and Section 4 of Chit Funds Act?

Submissions/Arguments

Applicants argued that they are similarly placed as co-accused Vikram Bangera who was granted bail; they have been in custody for over two years; investigation is complete; no prima facie case of cheating as the chit fund scheme was registered. State opposed bail, contending that the applicants were involved in a large-scale fraud, the investigation is ongoing, and there is likelihood of tampering with evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

Bail should be granted on the principle of parity when co-accused similarly placed has been granted bail and there are no distinguishing features. Additionally, where the prima facie case of cheating is not made out and the investigation is complete, continued detention is not warranted.

Judgment Excerpts

These applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Applicant Sachin Shelar and Taha Hafi Kaii have been cited as accused nos.2 and 1 respectively in Crime No.I-116 of 2018. Co-accused Vikram Bangera has been granted bail by the Sessions Court. The applicants are entitled to bail on the ground of parity.

Procedural History

FIR registered on 31st June 2018; applicants arrested on 4th June 2018 (Kaii) and 18th June 2018 (Shelar); charge-sheet filed on 31st June 2018 against accused nos.1 and 2; supplementary charge-sheet on 9th October 2018 against accused no.3; bail applications filed under Section 439 CrPC; reserved on 28th January 2021; pronounced on 8th February 2021.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 419, 420, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 171, 34
  • Chit Funds Act, 1982: 4
  • Information Technology Act, 2000: 66D
  • Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act: 3
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Chit Fund Fraud Case on Grounds of Parity and Lack of Prima Facie Evidence of Cheating. Co-accused already granted bail by Sessions Court; applicants similarly placed and entitled to bail under Section 439 ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Acquittal in Imports and Exports Control Case — Export Obligations Fulfilled Within Extended Time. Failure to Prove Contravention of Licence Conditions Under Section 5 of Imports and Exports (Control) Act,...