Wasim Akram and Ganesh Mahato V. Union of India through C.B.I.

B.A./10058/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Wasim Akram and Ganesh Mahato, who were accused in a financial fraud case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prize Chit and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978. The allegations centered around their involvement with M/s Sparsh Projects India Limited, which purportedly solicited public investments with false assurances of high returns, without being registered as a non-banking finance company. The petitioners argued that they were not signatories to the investment schemes and had fully cooperated with the investigation. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) opposed the bail, citing the petitioners' roles in soliciting investments. However, the court found that continued custody was unnecessary.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 800883 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Sidhartha Versus State of U.P. (2022) 1 SCC 676, Satender Kumar Antil Vs CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51, Aman Preet Singh Vs CBI, 2021 SCC Online SC 941
• Laws Referred To: Indian Penal Code, Prize Chit and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR; CHANDANA KUMARI; NITISH SARTHI
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATIUSH LALA
• Keywords: Bail; Custody; False Assurance; Non-banking finance company; Public investment; High interest rate
• Section: 6; 5; 3; 4; 468; 420; 471; 120B; 406; 467

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10058 of 2023 ------ 1. Wasim Akram 2. Ganesh Mahato .... .... …. Petitioners Versus Union of India through C.B.I. .... .... .... Opp. Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI Ms. Chandana Kumari, A.C. to ASGI Mr. Nitish Parth Sarthi, A.C. to ASGI ------ Order No.02 Dated : 15.12.2023 Heard both the sides. The petitioners- Wasim Akram and Ganesh Mahato are in custody in connection with R.C. Case No. 20(S)/2017 E.O.W.(R) for the offence registered under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5 and 6 read with Section 3 of Prize Chit and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Dhanbad. As per the prosecution case, M/s Sparsh Projects India Limited started its operation in Jamtara District of Jharkhand during 2011-12 by opening office and collection centre. The main Director of the Company was Mr. Debashis Mukherjee, who along with other co-accused persons including this petitioner formed this company and solicited public investment by making false assurance of windfall gain on investment at a very high interest rate. The Company in its Fixed Deposit plan offered exorbitant returns as high as multiplying investment to the tune of 1.15 times in one year, 1.5 times in two year, double in 4 ½ year, triple in 7 years and so on. Similarly, attractive recurring deposits scheme were floated by which the Company received total investment of Rs.7,18,800/- which were not paid to investors as per the assured return. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners that he was not signatory of any of the Fixed Deposit or Recurring Deposit scheme which was signed by Debashis Mukherjee. The petitioners have fully co- operated during investigation and after investigation, charge sheet has also been submitted. In view of the ratio decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sidhartha Versus State of U.P. reported in (2022) 1 SCC 676 Satender Kumar Antil Vs CBI reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Aman Preet Singh Vs CBI, 2021 SCC Online SC 941, no further purpose would be served to arrest the accused. The petitioners are in custody since 10.07.2023. Learned ASGI has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that these petitioners were also instrumental in soliciting investment on behalf of Company being the founding, Director. The Company was not registered with Reserve Bank of India as non-banking finance Company. The said company was not authorized to raise deposit from public. Under the circumstances, the above named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below and one of the bailors will be Income Tax Payee. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit "