It was a failed project and his intention to return hard earned money of complainants is seen from the effort he made to return the principle amount to complainants: Delhi High Court

 BAIL APPLN. 2940/2022


This petition is filed for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.58/2017 under Section 406/409/420/120B IPC registered at police station Economic Offences Wing. Bail petition before HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA.

120 B

Punishment of criminal conspiracy.
406 Punishment for criminal breach of trust
409 Criminal breach of trust by public, servant. or by banker, merchant or agent

Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property


In 2012 the petitioner ventured in real estate business and earmarked a land in sector-102, Dwarka-Gurgaon Expressway. Petitioner was an Ex-Air force officer who took voluntary retirement and ventured into this field. On the basis of his limited knowledge and information he received, he was made to understand that the land intended to offer for investment would come into the municipal limits within a year of completion of the expressway.

The petitioner was novice in the real estate market, he in order to understand the further feasibility of his idea decided to float the entire scheme to the people and as such the petitioner made the offer of share in a 2 acre parcel of land @ Rs.24.00 lacs for 220 sq. yds. or @ Rs.12.00 lacs for 110 sq.yds. of land.

The above offer was restricted only for share in land and not for constructing flats. The petitioner also incorporated a company for this purpose on 29.08.2012.

The scheme attracted various members (complainants). Only 1.4 acres could be purchased instead of the originally decide 2 acres. This was because of the non-payment by the members and some portion being under some family dispute amongst the owners.

The main complainant in the petition Mr.Tanmay Sharma also did not make the entire payment in time and paid the balance amount only in February, 2013 after the registry of the said 1.4 acres of land.

It is alleged that approximately Rs.40.00 lacs of pensionary benefits received post retirement by the petitioner was also lost in sustaining the company and clearing its dues.

Though the FIR was registered in the year 2017 but the petitioner was making all efforts to return the money.

In October, 2017 the petitioner’s brother in law through his company M/s. Jain Link Pvt. Ltd. offered to purchase all assets of M/s.DEF Housing Pvt. Ltd. for a sum of Rs.9.65 crores. The said amount was required to be paid the shareholders and to close the matter. This proposal was communicated to all the members of M/s.DEF Housing Pvt. Ltd.

In the Extraordinary General Meeting of the company 86% of the voters voted in favour of M/s.Jain Link Pvt. Ltd. proposal. But Mr.Tanmay Sharma (complainant) held the land in a hope Dwarka Expressway was likely to be completed in near future.

In 2019 the petitioner was arrested in the above stated matter but since his intention was to pay the entire amount, hence his wife on his behalf, entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on 25.06.2019 with the complainant, executed and signed during the bail proceedings before the learned Session’s Judge and only after this the petitioner was granted bail.

As per said MoU the petitioner was to pay Rs.9.50 crores to the members as principle amount as also 12% interest on delayed payments. He was granted conditional bail by the learned Session’s Court on 25.06.2019.

It is stated that he petitioner after March, 2020 sold his property on just to deposit an amount of Rs.9.50 crores and suffered further losses. On account of non-payment of interest the learned Sessions Court on 08.12.2021 had decided to dismiss the bail of the petitioner.

The said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in CRL.M.C.3268/2021 and this Court directed the learned Session’s Court to restore the original bail application and the petitioner was given an opportunity to file additional grounds for seeking bail and the bail application was directed to be decided on merits.

But learned Session’s Court yet again dismissed the bail application and granted some time for the petitioner to surrender. The petitioner surrendered on 24.09.2022 and is in custody till date.


The Court observed that the venture of the petitioner into the Real estate was a failed project and his intention to return hard earned money of complainants is seen from the effort he had made to return the principle amount to complainants. The petitioner also endeavors to return interest in due course and if is unable to return then shall face trial. Therefore the Court found it to be unreasonable to keep the petitioner in custody.

He is granted bail on his executing a personal of Rs.1.00 lac with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

The Court ordered that the petitioner should keep his mobile location app open at all time and shall not leave the country without prior permission of the learned Trial Court.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”


Click here to view your judgement


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *