..1.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
CNR NO.MHCC02-012365-2024
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE,
(CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT,
1988)
FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO.626 OF 2024
IN
ACB REMAND APPLICATION NO.901 OF 2024
IN
(C.R. NO. 07 OF 2024)
Anilkumar Babulal Runthala
Age: 43 Major, Occupation: Business,
Indian Inhabitant, residing at 1,
Jeevan Prakash Society, Darpan
Cross Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad,
Gujarat.

]
]
]
]
]
]
…Applicant
]
]
…Respondent
V/s.
State of Maharashtra
(Through Anti-Corruption Division, Mumbai,
Appearances :
Mr. Lade, Ld. A.P.P. for the State.
Advocate Mr. Mahesh Vinod Rajpopat for applicant.
CORAM:
DATED:
H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE
UNDER P.C. ACT
S.B. JOSHI
(C.R. No.46).
3rd SEPTEMBER, 2024.
:ORDER:
This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed for
regular bail by applicant Anilkumar Babulal Runthala in C.R.
No.07/2024 under Sections 7,13(1)(a) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of
..2…B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 120(B), 403, 409, 420, 465, 467,
468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short УIPCФ ) registered
with Anti Corruption Bureau, Mumbai.
2.

The report was lodged by Sanjay Raosaheb Tekade
(Assistant Commissioner State Tax) wherein it is alleged that
applicant/accused
(STO)
MUM-BCP-C-20
and
MUM-BCP-C-26,
Ghatkopar Division during his tenure from 2020-2021 failed to follow
SOP and though he was authorized to deal with G.S.T. refund of
Rs.10,00,000/-, still passed bills of 16 bogus companies and allowed
G.S.T refund of Rs.1,75,93,12,622/-. In view of the same, inquiry was
conducted by the SIT of 4 members in which it was found that one of
the co-accused namely Amit Lalge gave G.S.T. refund to the following
16 bogus claimants:
Sr. Claimant Taxpayer
No.

GSTN. No.

Prop./Director/
Partner
Refundable
amount in Rs.

1.

M/s. Liberty Traders
27BETPC5060E1ZJ
Wahid H. Chaudhary
28,25,52696/-
2.

M/s.
Expo.

Zabi-ur-Rehman
Kamruddin Salmani
26,08,10,658/-
3.

M/s. Tradeset Export 27AAICT9139N1Z1
& Marketing (OPC)
Pvt. Ltd.,
Dipak K. Sejwal
20,17,90,344/-
4.

M/s.
Technotip 27AAICT2663H1Z4
Marketing (OPC) Pvt.
Ltd.,
Mohd.
Akhlakh 19,96,17,724/Ziauddin Ansari
5.

M/s.
Outsource 27AADCO3999A1ZB Rehmat Ali Momin
Optimization (OPC)
Pvt. Ltd.,
6.

M/s. Linkpark Infra 27AAECL6357J1Z4
(OPC) Pvt. Ltd.,
Avesh
Maniyar
Abdulgani 13,71,68,068/-
7.

M/s. Buildnet Export 27AAKCB2155J1ZK
& Marketing (OPC)
Pvt. Ltd.,
Dilip
Salunke
Dattatraya 13,46,98,744/-
8.

M/s.
Floways 27AAECF3530H1ZU
Marketing (OPC) Pvt.
Ltd.,
Rehmat Ali Momin
9.

M/s.

S.K.

Edan
Fashion 27EUDPS4833L1Z1
Square 27BQMPR6313Q1ZZ Ramesh
19,54,70,404/-
7,65,78,416/-
Kashinath 6,21,99,464/-
..3.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
Solution
Raut
10. M/s.
Shri
Traders
Balaji 27EBOPS6093C1Z4
Rohit Sunil Sonkar
2,99,95,518/-
11. M/s. Virtual Overseas
27EKVPK3191R1ZY
Vikas
Kumawat
Shankarlal 2,80,95,172/-
12. M/s. Irik Fashions
27BSTPL3940G1ZA
Ajaykumar
Nishad
13. M/s. Gladstone
27EUYPR9731M1Z8 Raju Shaikh
2,30,18,674/-
14. M/s. Onex Enterprises 27DAWPP6159Q1ZA Sujan Pandit
1,34,91,246/-
15. M/s.
Enterprises
1,64,24,636/-
Ramprit 8,60,71,214/-
Delmoon 27EDNPM8636Q1ZD Danish Nishar Malik
16. M/s. Onix Tradelink
27AMMPA8655P1ZA Sameer Safiqe Ahmed 1,13,29,644/Total Rs…..

3.

175,93,12,622/-
As such the Additional Commissioner, Mazgaon, Mumbai
directed to file FIR against the culprits i.e. other co-accused and the
concerned persons of the 16 bogus companies.
4.

Applicant by moving this application submitted that he has
not been arraigned as an accused in the present F.I.R. However, he came
to be arrested on 06.08.2024 in connection with the FIR and after
seeking sufficient PCR he has been taken in judicial custody on
12.08.2024. He further contended as to how the present FIR came to be
lodged by giving concise summation of the prosecution case. According
to him, it is alleged in the remand papers, so far as he alone is
concerned, that a sum of Rs.34,51,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty- Four Crore
Fifty- One Lakhs Only) was deposited in Bank of Account of Company
namely BRR Udyog Pvt. Ltd. i.e. A/C No.00000040067775393 from
various companies by giving details of alleged transfer, as mentioned in
this application. Also it is alleged against him that an additional sum of
Rs.4,60,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore Sixty Lakhs Only) allegedly
transferred by one Siya Trading in the Bank A/C of Runthala Enterprise
..4…B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
Pvt. Ltd., at SBI. So according to him, original complainant is
contending that a total sum of Rs.39,11,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Nine
Crore and Eleven Lakhs Only) has been transferred to his above said
Bank A/C No.39485603350. He further contends that on questioning to
him during inquiry, he has stated that he being gold merchant said
amount came to be transferred to his said accounts which is against the
gold purchased by the companies & also confessed before the
Investigating Authority that he had transferred said amount to three
different bank accounts belonging to hawala traders. According to him,
as per prosecution story in remand, it is alleged that he got commission
from the said transaction from the main accused in this crime.
5.

The applicant has further contended that he has been
falsely arrested in this crime. To substantiate his contentions as to how
he is not involved in the alleged transaction or the sum involved in the
crime, he has given factual matrix of the case, by filing certain
documents like Exh. СDТ Colly the MoA and AoA of BRR Udyog Pvt. Ltd.,
Exh. E Colly- the MoA & AoA of Runthala Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., Exh.F
Colly- Ledger & Tax Invoices of sales in respect of Gold Buildnet worth
Rs.10,49,00,000/- to one Buildnet Exports & Marketing OPC Pvt. Ltd.,
from 23.02.2022 to 02.03.2022, another Ledger & Tax invoices i.e.
Exh.G Colly, Exh. H Colly, Exh.I Colly disclosing sale of another gold
bullions to Liberty Traders, Technotip Marketing OPC Pvt. Ltd., & Siya
Trading respectively. Likewise he is relying on documents Ц Exh.J- Colly
& Exh. K Colly i.e. GST Returns and Account Statement respectively
showing transaction entered into by Runthala Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.

..5.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
6.

According to applicant, during inquiry/investigation on
13.07.2024 he has also emailed all these documents from his email
address to the respondentТs email address. Thus, now there remains
nothing to keep him custody as he has already submitted required
documents with Investigating Authority and also he has co-operated
with the respondents since May 2024. The complaint & statement of the
complainant are devoid of any merits. Nothing has been recovered from
him during remand. He has no connection with the allegations in the
FIR. He is businessman and resident of Gujarat State. He is ready to cooperate with investigation as and when required. He will not abscond.
He is ready to abide with any condition imposed. Thus on these grounds
he prayed for his release u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with the crime
in question & also on cash bail.
7.

The respondent/IO and APP both have opposed this
application by filing joint say Exh.2 on ground that during investigation
it has transpired that out of total fraud i.e. Rs.175 crores, a sum of
Rs.39.11 crores has been received by the applicant in his company
which has been found diverted in his three bank accounts. The
accused/applicant has not given the detailed account in that regard.
Also he has no supplied necessary details in shape of documents to
falsify that he has no connection with the alleged transactions in the
crime in question. He is involved in the transactions with the alleged
companies which are not existence at all. The end use of the amount
diverted in the bank account of applicant is under investigation. Further
this applicant has informed the Investigating Authority that on the say
of one Swami and Sameer Shaikh he has entered into transaction for
the amount of Rs.39.11 crore, but has not given their full names or
..6…B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
whereabout. The investigation against this applicant is going on and if
the applicant released then he will definitely destroy the evidence in
connection with the crime. Thus, the respondent submitted for rejection
of the application.
8.

Alongwith this application, the applicant has placed on
record bunch of various documents as well as additional compilation of
documents in respect of BRR Udyog Pvt. Ltd. & Runthala Enterprise Pvt.
Ltd.,. He has also placed on record rough sketch showing how the
tainted sum in question pertains to sale of gold to various companies
and how it came to be transferred in the bank accounts.
9.

Heard Ld. counsel for the applicant at length and Ld. APP
and IO. In the light of rival contentions and submissions on record
following points arise for the determination of the Court and finding
thereon are given for the reason stated therein:
NOS.
1.

POINTS
FINDINGS
Whether the applicant Anilkumar Babulal Е.In the negative.
Runthala is entitled for his relief under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C. as prayed ?

2.

What order ?

…As per final order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS.1 & 2:
10.

The crux of the submissions by the learned counsel for the
applicant is that the applicant being a businessman dealing with sale of
Gold and he has other business. He is not concerned with the alleged
transaction as well as crime in question. Whatever the amount is stated
..7.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
to be diverted in his accounts as alleged it pertains to his gold stock
which came to be sold to three persons/companies, i.e. Buildnet, Liberty
Traders and Technotip Marketing Company. The allegations in last two
paras of FIR as to diverting the amount in his Bank Accounts are
baseless. The FIR is also silent to show his involvement in the crime.
The applicant being businessman, is regularly paying tax & filing
returns. The applicant has furnished all the relevant papers/documents
related with the alleged sum of Rs.39.11 crores with Investigating
Authority. Now most of the investigation is completed as the
Investigating Authority has already filed the charge-sheet against rest of
the arrested co-accused. So now there is no need to keep the applicant
behind bar. No purpose will serve in keeping him in jail. Whatever
amount is stated to be diverted in the bank accounts of applicant it is
arising out of his gold business. He has no criminal antecedent. He is
not related with the accusation under P.C. Act. The submission made by
the Ld. counsel is also on the same footing like the averments made in
this application. So the Ld. counsel submitted for granting regular bail
to the applicant and also submitted that applicant is ready to abide with
the condition imposed.
11.

As against this, Ld. APP and Investigating Officer both
submitted on the same lining as contended in their joint say. They both
further added that during investigation it is found that the part of the
sum involved in the crime has been diverted in the bank accounts of the
applicant, therefore, he has been added as accused in the crime.
Secondly, whatever the documents furnished earlier by the applicant
those are not complete one and only on that basis investigation can not
be stated as completed. However, according to them, even if the
..8…B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
applicant has tendered the additional compilation of documents during
his submission to falsify his involvement in the crime a transaction,
those are required to be scrutinized for which time is required. Since
there is prima facie material to see that out of alleged fraud amount, a
sum of Rs.39.11 crores has been diverted in the bank accounts of the
applicant, the detail investigation is needed. It applicant released, then
possibility of tampering with the witnesses and documents at his hands
cannot be ruled out.
12.

Now coming towards the facts in hand, admittedly, the
investigation in respect of other co-accused who have been arrested is
completed and it is fairly submitted by the Investigating Officer and Ld.
APP that charge-sheet is came to be filed only against them. Even if the
applicant has stated that he has already supplied the detail information
coupled with the documents marked as Exh.D-Colly to Exh.N-Colly as
cited in this application and whatever copies of additional compilation
of voluminous documents tendered while arguing this application, but
at the same time it is also submission of respondent in their say as well
as oral that those are incomplete & requires to be scrutinized as well as
verified thoroughly. So filing additional compilation of documents on
record can not be given much more importance at this stage to conclude
that nothing is remained to be investigated against this applicant for the
simple reason that those all are subject to scrutiny and verification by
the Investigating Agency. Admittedly, the investigation of crime in
question as regard the applicant is yet not completed and charge-sheet
is yet to be filed against him. Since the allegations are in respect of
Economic Offences involving huge amount in crores, certainly it
involves deep rooted conspiracies and also involves huge loss of public
..9.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
funds. The submission of the Ld. counsel for the applicant that as to the
alleged sum of Rs.39.11 crores is not related with the sum of Rs.175
crores (alleged amount of cheating herein), is subject to thorough
investigation which is not yet complete. Considering the the nature and
gravity of the alleged offences, and having regard to alleged loss of
public funds, it cannot be concluded at this stage that though the
applicant is not found named in the FIR, his involvement is not there or
the sum found and alleged diverted in his bank accounts did not form
part of huge amount of Rs.175 crores (alleged amount of cheating in
the crime). As such, the submission by the Ld. counsel for the applicant
that, the applicant is not having nexus or has no concern with the
alleged accusation and therefore, he is entitled for his release on bail,
finds not acceptable. Since the role of the applicant is under
investigation the position would be cleared only on filing of the chargesheet against the applicant. Hence, prima facie applicant is not entitled
for his release on bail. Therefore, the point No.1 is answered in the
negative.
13.

In view of aforesaid reasoning and findings on point No.1
as above, the application deserves to be rejected. As such, point No.2 is
answered as per following order:
ORDER
1.

The Bail Application at Exh.4 filed by the applicant/accused
namely Anilkumar Babulal Runthala in connection with the crime
No.07/2024 registered with Anti Corruption Bureau, Mumbai for
the offences punishable under Sections 7,13(1)(a) r/w 13(2) of
the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 120(B), 403,
..10…B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
is hereby rejected.
2.

Accordingly, the respondent/IO to take note of this order.

3.

The present Bail Application at Exh.4 stands disposed of
accordingly.
SANJAY
BHALCHANDRARAO
JOSHI
Digitally signed by
SANJAY
BHALCHANDRARAO
JOSHI
Date: 2024.09.03
17:00:40 +0530
(S.B. JOSHI)
Date:-03/09/2024
Special Judge, under P.C. Act
City Sessions Court for Greater Bombay
at Mumbai.
Dictated on
: 03/09/2024
Transcribed on
: 03/09/2024
Signed on
: 03/09/2024
Sent to Dept. on :
..11.. B.A. No.626/2024 in ACB R.A. No.901/2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
03/09/2024 at 4:58 p.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Subhash Sukhdeo Poul
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge
(With Court Room No.

H.H.J. Shri. S.B. Joshi
(Court Room No.46)
)
Date
of
Pronouncement
Judgment/Order
of 03/09/2024
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on
03/09/2024
Judgment/Order uploaded on
03/09/2024