O-B.A.No.368/2024
1
Dt.10.06.2024
MHCC020068682024
BEFORE THE DESIGNATED COURT UNDER M. P. I. D. ACT
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURT, Gr. BOMBAY.
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 368 OF 2024
IN
CRIME NO. 282 OF 2024
IN
MPID REMAND APPLICATION NO. 513 OF 2024
Arun Chandran
Residing at 1504, 15th Floor,
Bldg. No 20, DB Ozone Ketkipada,
Near Thakur MaII, Dahisar East,
Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban
Maharashtra, 400 068
(Accused in the judicial custody)
…Applicant/
accused
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Through Bangur Nagar Police Station,
Goregaon, Mumbai.

…Respondent
Coram : HHJ Abhijeet A. Nandgaonkar
(Court No. 20)
Date
: 10.06.2024
Appearance:
Ld. Adv. Murtaza Najmi alongwith Adv. Ms. Sonia Sunil for
Applicant/accused.
Ld. APP. Mrs. Chaitrali Panshikar for the Respondent/State-EOW.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
By way of this application, applicant/accused Arun Chandran
prayed for grant of bail under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal
O- B.A.368/2024
2
Dt.10.06.2024
Procedure, 1973 (here in after referred as “Cr.P.C.” ) in connection with
Crime No. 282/2024 registered with Bangur Nagar Police station for the
offence punishable under section 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code
(here in after referred as “IPC”) with section 3 and 4 of Maharashtra
Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishment) Act
1999 ( here in after referred as “MPID Act”).
02.

Ld. Adv. Mr. Murtaza Najmi alongwith Adv. Ms. Sonia Sunil
appearing for the applicant/accused submitted that, on the complaint of
Mr. Dhanyeshwar Shankar Bansode the above offence having Crime no.
282/2024 came to be registered with Bangur Police Station, Goregaon
on 15.04.2024. In that crime the applicant/accused Arun Chandran
came to be arrested on 22.04.2024 thereafter he was remanded for
police custody till 26.04.2024 and after 26.04.2024 he was remanded to
judicial custody of this court.
03.

Ld. Adv. submitted that, applicant/accused is director of ABB
Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. which is registered under Companies Act and also
registered in SEBI as per the rules and regulations. They have issued
advertisement to call public at large to invest their money in the said
company. Applicant is permanent resident of Mumbai and residing with
his family. He has good roots in the society. Complainant Mr.
Dhayaneshwar Shankar Bansode is retired bus conductor in BEST
receiving pension. In the month of October 2023, the first informant’s
friend Mr. Rajaram Shripati Wagekar had forwarded WhatsApp
advertisement on the mobile phone and asked to invest with good
return of 40% by ABB Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. Thereafter the informant
was told by
Mr. Rajaram Shripati Wagekar and he invested Rs.

2,00,000/- and he has received three installments against the said
investment. Thereafter, in the month of October 2023 the informant and
O- B.A.368/2024
3
Dt.10.06.2024
his friend Mr. Rajaram Shripati Wagekar visited office of ABB
Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. at Malad and met with accused Ajay Kumar
Chandran and made inquiry. As per the information received from the
applicant/accused, the informant was ready to invest in the company
which has assured to give 40% return on every month and company’s
head office is situated in Cochin, Kerala. Therefore the first informant
invested Rs.1,50,000/- with the company. The amount of Rs.1,00,000/was paid through online payment and Rs. 50,000/- was paid in cash.
Accordingly, agreement was executed between the applicant/accused
and the first informant.
04.

On 06.02.2024 the first informant has received Rs. 60,000/- in
his bank. The informant did not received installment for the month of
March-24 inspite of lapse of considerable period. When he tried to
contact the applicant/accused on his mobile phone, was found switched
off. Therefore, the informant and his friend Rajaram visited office of the
applicant at Cochin, Kerala, but no such company has been found in
existence. Informant came to know that applicant/accused Arun Kumar
Chandran has cheated many investors, therefore FIR is registered
against him in Kashigaon, Mira Road, East and came to be arrested due
to which he was not able to receive amount. As applicant informed
complainant that their company is registered under SEBI, complainant
and his friend Rajaram invested total amount of Rs. 24,00,000/- on the
assurance that they will gate 40% for which the accused executed
agreement for the period of 12 months. As first informant has not able
to receive second installment he got aggrieved and lodged report and
the offence came to be registered.
05.

Ld. Adv for the Applicant/accused submitted that, no such
offence has been committed. 12 months period has to be expired, thus
O- B.A.368/2024
4
Dt.10.06.2024
no cause of action accrued in favour of the informant to lodge the FIR
and thus no offence has been made out. Informant has received his first
installment of Rs. 60,000/- and the agreement is valid upto 30.12.2024.
Therefore, prima facie no offence has been made out. The prosecution
story is based on false and baseless footing. Applicant/accused is
bonafide and genuine business man and doing his business with the
permission of competent authority. Applicant/accused being bonafide
businessman has returned money to various investors. Investigating
officer has interrogated the Applicant/accused and also seized
muddemal by visiting office of the Applicant/accused. It is civil contract
and no criminal offence has been committed. Applicant/accused has
refunded certain amount alongwith interest to some of the investors.
Therefore there is no malafide intention to cheat or defraud the
investors. Thus Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC levied against the
applicant/accused are not attracted. So also Sections 3 and 4 of the
MPID Act are also not applicable as no cause of action was accrued to
the file present FIR. Therefore, if the Applicant/accused is kept behind
the bars will not serve any purpose. Applicant/accused is ready to abide
all the terms and condition imposed by this court if bail is granted to
him, He is ready to deposit amount in this court. He is ready to cooperate investigating officer to provide all necessary information. He
will not flee away from trial. Thus Applicant/accused prayed to grant
this application to release the applicant/accused on bail.
06.

Say of the investigating officer and Ld. APP is called.

Investigating officer through Ld. APP filed their say vide Exh.3 on
03.05.2024 and filed their detailed reply , also at the time of final
argument additional reply dated 04.06.2024 at Exh.7 came to be filed.
Applicant/accused also filed rejoinder dated 09.05.2024 at Exh. 4.

O- B.A.368/2024
07.

5
Dt.10.06.2024
Prosecution strongly opposed bail application. Ld. APP contended
that, during the investigation it was revealed that applicant/accused has
duped amount of Rs. 65,44,000/- of 23 investors who have invested
money in the company of the applicant/accused on the assurance of
40% return varying for the period of 5 months to 12 months. Some
installments were paid, but the full amount has not been paid.
Therefore, considering the nature of offence applicant/accused should
not be released on bail. Applicant/accused is resident of Karala, if he is
released on bail, he may jump over the bail bonds and will not remain
present for trial and tamper the investigation and hamper evidence and
prosecution witnesses. Offence is serious, amount of various investors
are involved and considering investment amount it is not possible for
applicant accused to repay even as assured inspite of the agreement
which was yet to be received by investors. Hence the prosecution
requested to reject the bail application.
08.

The applicant in rejoinder has given table showing pendency
amount of Rs. 4,48,000/- to the investors as per the schedule being
matured and also submitted that amount due was till the year 2025 will
be paid regularly, on that count the applicant/accused can not be kept
behind the bars. No criminal offence is made out. Prima facie it is civil
contract. There is no malafide intention of the applicant to cheat the
investors. Hence it can not attract offence under Sections 3 and 4 of the
MPID Act in support in rejoinder during argument by placing copies of
UTI slips alongwith copies of the agreement entered with the investors.
09.

Ld. advocate for the applicant/accused submitted that, in
Criminal Petition No. 3119 and 3122 of 2024 the Telangana High Court
pleased to grant Anticipatory Bail to the accused in the such type of
O- B.A.368/2024
6
Dt.10.06.2024
offence with condition and therefore he be released on bail on such
conditions.
10.

Ld. APP Mrs. Chaitrali Panshikar strongly opposed contention by
submitting that, investor is a retired Bus Conductor whose hard amount
from his service have been duped whose name also register on the
company’s agreement as per assurance of 40% return was to be paid
which was not paid and thus alongwith this informant Mr.
Dhayaneshwar Shankar Bansode and other investors including his
friend and brother who invested Rs.24,00,000/- in the company was
not received back to the informant and others. Even after registration of
the FIR, during the investigation at least 23 investors approached to the
IO with their document/agreement whose statements were recorded
and further investors whose amount raising more than Rs. 65,44,000/-.
Out of the investment of Rs. 91,66,000/- only Rs. 26,42,000/- has been
repaid and remaining yet to be paid. Also it was found that similar
nature offence has been registered against the applicant/accused
Ajaykumar @ Arun Chandran
at Kashigaon police station who has
committed offence under crime No. 25/2024 under Section 420 and
406 of the IPC where in he was taken into custody and then he was
transferred in this crime registered with Bangur Nagar police station
C.R.No. 282 of 2024. Therefore, Ld. APP prayed that applicant/accused
should not be released on bail.
11.

Heard Ld. Adv. Mr. Murtaza Najmi alongwith Adv. Ms. Sonia
Sunil appearing for the accused/applicant, and Ld. APP Mrs. Chaitrali
Panshikar for the State-EOW alongwith investigating officer Mr. Laxman
Karande. Perused application, documents and submissions of respective
parties.

O- B.A.368/2024
12.

7
Dt.10.06.2024
After going through the submission, provision of MPID Act under
Section 3 has been challenged to be pre matured in lieu of the
Agreement
which
enter
with
informant
and
company
of
applicant/accused being having for the period of 12 months which will
come to an end on 30.12.2024. Therefore, when the table has been put
forth by the investigating officer about around 23 investors, in which it
is found that, the assurance of return of 20% to 40% starting first
informant has been paid and the further installment remains to be paid.
There is nothing on record to hold that, applicant/accused who has
received amount from the investors in his company which is alleged to
have been registered head office at Cochin, Kerala was not found in
existence when first informant alongwith his friend and other investors
visited the said office. Even investigating officer after perusal of that
certificate alongwith GST certificate, Income Tax etc and other
document during the investigation was not able to fortify its office and
address mentioned at 39/2475-B1, Suite 411, Lr. Towers, SJRRA104,
South Janatha Rd., Palarivattom, Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala India
682025.
13.

Thus, assurance to the investors are found to be in vain about
their return of 40% by the applicant/accused being managing director
of his company. Even office at Malad, Mumbai has been closed and head
office shown at Cochin was not found in existence. In such
circumstances, when applicant/accused already arrested in Kashigaon
police station in Crime No. 25/2024 for the offence punishable under
section 420 and 406 of the IPC and transferred in this matter. The
investigation is in progress it will reveal the fact from the point recovery
of the invested amount of the investors.

O- B.A.368/2024
14.

8
Dt.10.06.2024
The applicant/accused submitted before this court about
readiness and willingness to deposit the amount in this Court, having
no substance when such type of huge return is assured i.e. 20% to 40%
to the investors to dupe them. Thus the modus-operandi to return first
installment to attract more investors to invest amount is nothing but
with sole intention to cheat the investors. In such circumstance
investigation is in progress possibility to cheat investors applicant
accused under titled of Managing director of ABB Company has
committed offence prima facie attracted under section 3 and 4 of MPID
Act alongwith 420 and 406 of the IPC . Therefore his released during
the course of investigation is not proper even on on imposing stringent
conditions.
15.

Authority relied by Ld. Adv. for the applicant/accused in Criminal
Petition Nos 3119 and 3122 of 2024 dated 22.03.2024 of Telangana
High Court can not be said to be applicable in the facts and
circumstance which is in respect of anticipatory bail powers where in
regular bail has been sought for releasing with accused. The submission
of Ld. App has substance that, the applicant/accused being resident of
Karala, if he is released on bail, he may jump over the bail bonds and
will not remain present for trial and tamper the investigation and
hamper evidence and prosecution witnesses. This possibilities can not
be ruled out. Offence is serious in nature amount of various investors
are involved and considering investment amount, it is not possible for
applicant/accused to repay even as assured inspite of the agreement
which was yet to be received by investors. This is subsequent offence of
the same nature which is registered against the applicant/accused.
Hence repeating the same crime to dupe the investors is possible if the
applicant accused is released on bail. Therefore application for grant
O- B.A.368/2024
9
Dt.10.06.2024
bail can not be consider at this stage which deserves to be rejected.
Hence I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1.

Bail
application
No.

368/2024
Applicant/Accused Arun Chandran
moved
in C.R.No.

by
282 of
2024 registered with Bangur Nagar Police Station for the
offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC and
under Section 3 and 4 of MPID Act in R.A.No.513 of 2024
is rejected.
2.

Case papers be filed.

3.

Concerned authority to take note.

4.

Accordingly, Bail Application No. 368/2024 is disposed of.

Dt. 10/06/2024
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
:
:
:
(Abhijeet A. Nandgaonkar)
Designated Judge under MPID Act, C.R.NO.20
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay.
10.06.2024
12.06.2024
12.06.2024
O- B.A.368/2024
10
Dt.10.06.2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
10.06.2024
Mrs. R. R. Hate
Name of the Judge
HHJ Shri Abhijeet A.
Nandgaonkar
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
10.06.2024
Judgment and order signed by 12.06.2024
P.O.
Judgment/order uploaded on
12.06.2024