When the investigation has been completed and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and he is no longer required for investigation purposes, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him detained in prison and the same was upheld by High Court of Delhi through the learned bench led by JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR in the case of TARUN KUMAR THROUGH: PAIROKAR OF SH ATUL KUMAR vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [BAIL APPLN. 1753/2021] on 22.03.2022.
The facts of the case are that a number of victims have filed complaint against accused Tarun Kumar i.e. petitioner regarding cheating of Rupees forty-two thousand crores approximately. It is alleged that accused persons induced the victims to invest Rs. 62,000 for a bike and were assured that they will receive Rs. 9,500 monthly including principal and rental income on a bike for one year. Due to lucrative offers floated by the accused persons, number of victims invested their hard-earned money in huge sums into this scheme. In January 2019, accused company launched Electric-Bike scheme and offered to investors that they can deposit Rs.1,24,000 for a bike and assured that they will receive Rs. 17,000 per month till one year. Initially, accused company repaid the assured amount but after winning confidence of the investors, they absconded.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the allegations made in the FIR have no relation with the petitioner. It was further submitted that the petitioner was in judicial custody 3 years. It was further submitted that it is wrong to suggest that the petitioner has received huge sum out of the investments made by the complainants as the petitioner did not receive any benefit or remuneration from the company apart from the salary to which he is entitled against his job and services to the said company.
The state’s counsel submitted that the allegations are serious in nature and the Company induced investments from gullible and innocent people by offering lucrative returns and floating the ponzi scheme. It was further submitted that the total cheated amount in the case is of more than Rupees forty-two thousand crores approximately and that he may abscond if he is released on bail and may not be available for trial which may vitiate the interests of justice.
The Court held that the investigation in this matter has been completed. Moreover, no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and he is no longer required for investigation purposes. The trial would take a long time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him detained in prison. The petitioner was therefore, granted bail by Court as by having similar allegations the co-accused persons have also been granted bail.
Judgment reviewed by – Shristi Suman