Bail denied in Rs.200 crore fraud case due to non-cooperation, absconding co-accused, and ongoing investigation

Delhi HC dismissed regular bail application in white collar crime case involving misappropriation and fraud exceeding Rs.200 crores of public money. Court held that petitioner failed to cooperate in investigation post-arrest, co-accused remain absconding, and allegations are serious in nature. SEBI had also passed orders against petitioner's company. Considering gravity of offence, nature of crime, huge public money involved yet to be recovered, and ongoing investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC with trial court directing further investigation, no grounds for bail were established.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner seeking regular bail in two cases under sections 409/420/477A/120B IPC; Allegations of misappropriation and fraud against the petitioner; Non-cooperation in the investigation by the petitioner; SEBI order freezing assets of the company; Dispute between parties characterized as a civil dispute turned criminal; Bail applications opposed on grounds of seriousness of allegations, non-cooperation, absconding co-accused, misappropriation of public funds, and risk of evading the legal process.

Analysis:
The petitions involve the petitioner seeking regular bail in two cases under sections 409/420/477A/120B IPC. The complaints allege that the petitioner, along with others, approached complainants to open Demat accounts, assuring safekeeping of equities. However, it is alleged that the shares were transferred without consent, misappropriated, and pledged as collateral. The petitioner has been in judicial custody, and charges have not been framed despite the lapse of time since the charge sheet was filed. The petitioner's defense relies on the Power of Attorney signed by complainants and transactions reflected in bank and trading accounts.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the case is a civil dispute given a criminal color, emphasizing the petitioner's clean antecedents and societal roots. However, the state and complainant's counsel opposed bail, citing the seriousness of allegations, lack of cooperation, freezing of assets by SEBI, and ongoing investigations. The state highlighted the misappropriation of over Rs.200 Crores, involvement of multiple victims, and absence of a money trail or explanation for the misappropriated funds.

The court noted the serious nature of the allegations, the petitioner's lack of cooperation in the investigation, and the absconding co-accused. The court referenced a Supreme Court judgment on economic offenses, emphasizing the impact of white-collar crimes on the economy and public trust. The court concluded that the gravity of the allegations, involvement of public funds, and pending investigations warranted denial of bail. The court dismissed the bail applications, citing the need to consider the gravity of the offense and the interests of justice.

In the final analysis, the court emphasized the seriousness of economic offenses, the need for a different approach to bail in such cases, and the significance of public funds involved. The court found no grounds for bail due to the gravity of the allegations, pending investigations, and the substantial amount of public money misappropriated. The court's decision to dismiss the bail applications was based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the ongoing investigations and the potential risk of evading legal proceedings.

---