Kulwant Kishori Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Aug 2021ABA/1038/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order rejects an anticipatory bail application filed by a former sub-broker accused of executing unauthorized transactions in a retired brigadier's Demat account via B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co., resulting in financial loss and the addition of Sections 465 and 468 IPC.

What the court decided

AI extract

¶1

3-aba-1038-2019.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1038 OF 2019

¶4

Kulwant Kishori Singh… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.… Respondents

¶7

Mr. Kafil A. Khan a/w Ms. Sana K. Khan, Advocate for the
Applicant.

¶8

Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶9

Mr. Manish Bohra i/b. Mr. A. S. Khan & Associate, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE: 3rd AUGUST, 2021.

¶11

PER COURT:

¶12

1.This is an application for pre-arrest bail in C.R. No.

Kulwant Kishori Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2021)

¶16

2.The First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) was
registered on 10th April, 2019. The case of the complainant is that
he is retired brigadier. The complainant was induced to trade with
B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. On 9th March, 2014, the complainant

¶20

filled up the form. Mobile number was given. E-mail ID and Demat
account was opened. The complainant invested amount around
Rs.40 Lakhs. Initially he earned profit of Rs.3,50,000/-. Since the
complainant was not getting good profit, he instructed the accused
to close the account in 2017. The complainant then realized and in
spite of instructions to close the account, the accused have
executed transactions without his consent. Incorrect information
was provided about trading. Hence, FIR was lodged on 10th April,
2019. The investigation was taken over by Crime Branch, Zone– III,
Kalyan.

¶22

4.Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that
there is no element of cheating in the transactions. All the
information was provided to the complainant. The complainant had
authorized the applicant to do transactions on his behalf by
executing authority letter. Several transactions were carried out
from 2014 to 2017 on behalf of first informant and his wife. The
applicant was authorized to deal in the shares as sub-broker on
behalf of B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. since August, 2013. In – 2016,

¶26

he was working as sub-broker. His wife was also working as sub-
broker in B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. All the transactions
conducted in the account of the first informant and his wife was
informed to them by E-mail and the accounts’ statements which
was acknowledged by them by 2014 to 2017. Reliance is placed on
the statements from 2014-2017. The statements of account shows
that there is no transactions in the account after the intimation for
closing account was given by the complainant. The allegations that
the first informant was not aware as to what transactions have
been executed is false. Whenever any transactions were executed in
the Demat account, immediately the E-mail is sent to the respective
account holder and also an SMS alert is sent on the registered
mobile number by B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. as well as National
Stock Exchange. The applicant used to forward the statements to
the first informant monthly or quarterly. The applicant has only
acted as sub-broker on behalf of first informant. The complainant
was aware as to what has happened in his account with regards to
trading in shares. The loss suffered by the complainant was a
transnational loss for which the applicant cannot be blamed. The
applicant was granted interim protection by this Court on 30th
April, 2019. The applicant is qualified person. The applicant has
cooperated with the investigation. He need not be subjected to

¶31

5.Learned APP submitted that requisite information was
not provided to the complainant. First informant was provided
information to applicant. The complainant has been cheated for
huge amount. Sections 465 and 468 were added during the course
of investigation.

¶32

6.Learned Advocate for the intervenor/complainant filed
affidavit in reply opposing the application. He submitted that the
complainant is retired brigadier aged 70 years. He had spent big
chunk of service in Army. In – 2014, the applicant and his wife
approached him to continues calls and exchanges to open trading
and Demat account with B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. The applicant
started visiting complainant’s house and insisted on opening the
trading account. Hence, the complainant opened the account along
with his wife. They were advised to invest their life saving in blue
chip companies as safe, secure and better earning option. Later on
complainant found that their holding statements were forged and
thus no such holdings in their account. The complainant and his
wife gradually made an investment of about Rs.50 Lakhs
approximately in equity and mutual fund. The complainant and his
wife had no knowledge about shares trading and hence both used

¶36

to make investment in blue chip company. The accused executed
many transactions in their accounts without their instructions and
knowledge. They misused trading and Demat account and blue
chip company and thus duped the amount around Rs. 47 Lakhs.
Reliance is placed on the bank statements of the complainant and
his wife for a period of 2014 to 2017. It is further submitted that
the complainant was also holding certain physical shares and
mutual funds in 2014, which were demated by the applicant in that
Demat account. The said shares and mutual funds immediately
amounting approximately Rs.14 to 15 Lakhs. The applicant and his
wife had conducted unauthorized transactions in the account of
complainant. Their signatures were obtained on blank papers. The
applicant used to send false misleading statements through the
account of personal E-mail ID which appears to be of B.M.A. Wealth
Creators Co. which was not official E-mail ID of the said Company.
The applicant used to send fake and misleading holding statements
which were far away from the actual transactions done by the
applicant in trading accounts. The holding statements were
prepared by the applicant to mislead the complainant. In August
and September – 2017 when the applicant refused to respond to
the calls of the complainant, inquiry was made with the Company.
No status of their holdings and balances and it was learnt that they

¶40

have nil balance in that trading and Demat account. Later on the
complainant learnt that the member broker is involved in scam and
SEBI has passed ex-parte ad interim order against member boker
B.M.A. Wealth Creators Co. and its directors. Since the complainant
was cheated, he lodged the FIR. He suffered huge loss of about
Rs.65 Lakhs.

¶41

7.The contention of the applicant is that all the requisite
information was provided to the applicant. The investigation is
taken over by the Crime Branch, Kalyan. The investigation papers
discloses that the complainant had provided Email-ID in the B.M.A.

¶43

correspondence on register E-mail ID. However, the applicant with
a view to mislead forwarded information from his personal E-mail
[email protected] personal E-mail ID of
complainant [email protected] false trading account status
report/holding statement. Inquiry was made about the existence of
shares in consonance with the statements and it was found therein
variation in the information. It was disclosed that accused had
forwarded false statements and hence, Sections 465 and 468 of IPC
was added. The scrutiny of the documents reveals that trading was

¶47

executed in the account of the complainant and shares were sold
and due to loss no information was provided in regard to the
complainant. No consent was obtained from them before executing
the transactions. The accused had executed transactions to earn
commission. Correspondence was exchanged with SEBI and it was
revealed that the stock broker is required to exchange
correspondence on registered E-mail and before trading, consent of
the customer is required to be obtained which was not done in the
present case. The applicant had forwarded fabricated holding
statements. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. In
the light of the investigation conducted by the Investigating agency
as stated above, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

Kulwant Kishori Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Renuka Namdeo Karkale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Julias Baliram Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nivrutti Dharma Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ankush Ramu Bhoir Vs State of Maharashtra

Kulwant Kishori Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Renuka Namdeo Karkale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Julias Baliram Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nivrutti Dharma Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ankush Ramu Bhoir Vs State of Maharashtra

A compact analysis

Subhashchandra Kanojia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gayatri Babulal Das Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.