Mumbai, February 27, 2024 – Imran Abdul Mannan Shaikh has been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in connection with an alleged property fraud case. The order, issued by Additional Sessions Judge S.B. Pawar in Court Room No. 58, pertains to Criminal Bail Application No. 417 of 2024.

Shaikh was arrested in connection with FIR No. 251 of 2022, registered at Shahu Nagar Police Station, for an offense under Section 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant, Mohd. Saif Shaikh, alleged that Imran Shaikh agreed to give him Room No. 602 in Messiah Islampura Co-operative Housing Society on a heavy deposit of ₹10,00,000. A registered leave and license agreement was executed on February 4, 2020, for a period of 33 months. The complainant claimed he paid the deposit by February 10, 2020, but Imran Shaikh failed to hand over possession of the room. It was later revealed that Imran Shaikh had sold the room to Akbar Ansar Sayyed on December 2, 2021, and failed to repay the deposit.

Imran Shaikh sought bail, claiming he was falsely implicated and had already repaid the ₹10,00,000 before the FIR was registered, a fact he alleged was suppressed by the complainant. He argued that the leave and license agreement was a security for a loan, not for possession of the room, and that the complainant was a money lender attempting to extract more money.

The prosecution opposed the bail, citing the need to recover the property, concerns about Imran Shaikh’s address, and the possibility of him threatening the complainant and witnesses. An intervenor, represented by Advocate Abdul Aziz Khan, claimed there were two separate transactions: a leave and license agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for a friendly loan, and that the repaid amount was adjusted against the MOU.

Judge Pawar, after considering the arguments and evidence, noted that Imran Shaikh was arrested in Bihar, where he was allegedly living under a false identity. He also observed that the leave and license agreement and the MOU were executed on the same day.

The court raised serious questions about the complainant’s conduct, noting that Imran Shaikh had transferred ₹10.64 lakhs to the complainant between June 29, 2020, and July 3, 2021, well before the FIR was registered. The court also questioned the complainant’s claim of a separate friendly loan, as there was no evidence of the loan amount being transferred to Imran Shaikh at the time of the MOU or soon after.

“There is substance in the submissions advanced on behalf of applicant that the first informant is involved in the business of money lending,” Judge Pawar stated in his order.

Considering that nothing was recovered from Imran Shaikh during his custodial interrogation and that further custody was not required, the court granted him bail under the following conditions:

• He must execute a Personal Recognizance (PR) Bond of ₹30,000 and furnish one or two sureties of the same amount.
• He is prohibited from influencing, threatening, or promising any person related to the case.
• He is prohibited from tampering with prosecution evidence.
• He is prohibited from committing similar offenses while on bail.
• He is prohibited from contacting the complainant or witnesses.
• He must submit his permanent address and contact details to the police station and court and inform of any changes.
• He must attend the trial regularly.
• Provisional cash bail of ₹30,000 is allowed for six weeks.
• Bail is to be executed before the learned trial court.

This decision highlights the court’s scrutiny of the complainant’s conduct and the need to ensure that criminal proceedings are not used for debt recovery. It also reflects the court’s consideration of the specific circumstances of the case and the need to balance individual liberty with the prevention of potential fraud.