High Court Delhi dismissed bail application of petitioner Prakash Kumar Singh in fraud case involving significant financial loss, deeming custodial interrogation essential due to multiple similar complaints and link to the accused.
The bail application alongwith pending application was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~64
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Laksh Khanna, APP for State with SI Vikram Singh PS IFSO/Special Cell, Delhi. Mr. Varun Garg, Mr. Shubham Paliwal, Advocates for complainant with complainant in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 19.09.2024
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:54
proprietorship of one Akalesh Das who is known to the present applicant. He submits that during the pendency of the anticipatory bail proceedings before the learned Sessions Court, a Status Report came to be filed wherein it has been so alleged.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:54
co-accused Akalesh Das. On further investigation, a total transaction of around Rs.80 crores was found from 01.01.2024 to 07.02.2024 which included the money that has come from the complainant’s account. It is further stated that three other similar complaints have been received pertaining to the said account. Insofar as the applicant’s connection with the said account is concerned, it is stated that the office of M/s AD Enterprises was also visited and the landlord was examined, who stated that the premises were rented by co-accused Akalesh Das and one Babu having mobile number 9205276169. On the CDR analysis of the said mobile number, it was found that the said number was initially active in Bihar and later in Dwarka, Delhi in a mobile phone having IMEI No. 867271055261840. Another mobile number 9102414983 was also found to be operational on the same IMEI number. Though the CAF forms are in the name of Akalesh Das who lives in Patna, the location of the mobile phone was found in Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi i.e. the place of the residence of the applicant. It is stated that barring 10 lakhs, the entire amount of Rs.80 crores was withdrawn before the investigating agency could take further action. The entire withdrawal was done through net-banking using the aforesaid mobile number and thereafter the aforesaid account has become inactive. It is also stated that even in the affidavit filed along with the present bail application as well as on the verification from school of the applicant’s child, the applicant’s address in the records is in Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi. As per the case of prosecution, the applicant is the mastermind who has withdrawn the entire amount by different modes including net/mobile banking.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:54
case and especially that not only the present complainant but there are other complainants who have alleged similar modus operandi of being cheated, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required in this case. Consequently, the present bail application alongwith pending application is dismissed.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J
SEPTEMBER 19, 2024/ rd
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:54
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of fraud and cheating.
Whether custodial interrogation is required given the multiplicity of complaints and the petitioner's alleged role.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PRAKASH KUMAR SINGH
STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
