The Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay granted regular bail to Vishal Ali Kesari in a significant case involving fraud and criminal breach of trust related to the non-delivery of mobile handsets. The order, delivered by Additional Sessions Judge Shri V. M. Sundale on May 2, 2024, in Criminal Bail Application No. 1028 of 2024, found that despite the seriousness of the offense, the applicant’s alleged role was less central than that of the main accused, making his continued detention unwarranted. Kesari was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 43/2024 registered at the Vakola Police Station for offenses under Sections 420 (Cheating), 406 (Criminal breach of trust), 504 (Intentional insult), 506 (Criminal intimidation), and 120(B) (Criminal conspiracy) read with 34 (Common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The core allegation was the misappropriation of a massive sum of ₹50,00,000/- intended for the purchase of mobile handsets.
The Nature of the Mobile Handset Fraud
The prosecution’s case stemmed from a complaint alleging that the applicant, Vishal Ali Kesari, and his co-accused, primarily Ashfak Ali Shaikh, had assured the informant the supply of mobile handsets at a discounted price. The informant initially received mobile handsets worth ₹5,90,000/- from the co-accused, which seemingly established trust. Capitalizing on this, Ashfak Ali Shaikh then accepted ₹50,00,000/- from the informant but failed to deliver the agreed-upon goods, resulting in cheating and criminal breach of trust. The FIR alleged that the present applicant and other co-accused were partners running a business under the name and style of A.S. Enterprises Company, implying a conspiracy to defraud the informant. The investigating officer, through learned APP Ms. Ratnavali Patil, strongly opposed the bail application, contending that the offense was serious, the investigation was in progress, and there was a possibility of the applicant pressurizing witnesses, committing similar offenses, or fleeing from justice. The prosecution specifically noted that a certain amount of the defrauded money had been transferred to the applicant’s account.
Judicial Scrutiny and Mitigation of Role
The Court, after hearing arguments from Ld. Advocate Shri Sagar Rane and the prosecution, meticulously reviewed the record. While acknowledging the seriousness of the crime, the Judge found critical differences in the roles of the accused. The order explicitly highlighted that the “main allegations of accepting Rs.50,00,000/- from the informant and not supplying mobile phone are against co-accused Ashfak Ali Shaikh.” The applicant’s counsel argued that Vishal Ali Kesari was merely an employee of the co-accused Ashfak Ali Shaikh and had no direct involvement with the alleged fraudulent transaction between the principal parties.
The Court noted that the applicant was arrested on March 22, 2024, had been in police custody until March 30, 2024, and was subsequently in judicial custody for more than one month. Critically, the Court determined that the applicant’s presence was “not necessary for any recovery or discovery” and that the prosecution placed nothing on record regarding any past criminal antecedents. Concluding that there were “no extra ordinary circumstances to keep the applicant behind bar” to complete the remaining part of the investigation, the Court decided that the apprehension expressed by the investigating officer could be effectively managed by imposing appropriate conditions.
Grant of Conditional Bail and Surety Provisions
Based on the subsidiary nature of his alleged role, the completion of his custodial interrogation, and the clean criminal record, the Court allowed Criminal Bail Application No. 1028 of 2024. The applicant, Vishal Ali Kesari, was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) Bond of ₹25,000/- with one or two sureties of the like amount. To secure his cooperation during the remaining investigation, the Court imposed stringent conditions: he is directed to attend the Vakola Police Station once a week, every Tuesday between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., until the charge-sheet is filed. Furthermore, he is prohibited from directly or indirectly making any inducement, threat, or pressurizing any person acquainted with the facts of the case, and he is barred from leaving India without the Court’s prior permission. To facilitate immediate release, the Court allowed provisional cash bail in the like amount, granting the applicant four weeks to furnish the required surety, failing which the cash bail would stand forfeited.