abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 53 OF 2008 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NOS. 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 AND 93 OF 2008 Prince Shyam Madamekar .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.M.J. Bhatt for the applicant. Mr.K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 12TH MARCH 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard both sides. 2. By these 27 applications, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") in respect of 27 crimes registered under various crime numbers mentioned at sr.nos.1 to 27 of Exhibit-B to Criminal - 2 - Application No.53 of 2007. The applicant has approached this court directly without approaching the Sessions Court in each of the districts on the ground that different offences have been registered in different districts on similar allegations and it would be extremely difficult for the applicant to approach each of the Sessions Court and apply for bail. 3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that common questions of law and facts are involved in all the matters and investigation in respect of all 27 cases has been clubbed by an order dated 6th September 2005 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal No.1785 of 2005 (Coram: S.S. Parkar & A.A. Mohta, JJ.) and hence also this Court may entertain the bail applications directly. The submission is accepted. 4. The facts in brief are that the applicant was a promoter - director of a company named "Kalpavruksha Marketing Pvt. Ltd." (for short "the Company"). The Company floated various schemes under which the investors were to deposit money periodically with the Company and at the end of the contract period, the Company was to return the money deposited together with the agreed rate of interest which apparently was very high. Several gullible investors invested money in the schemes of the Company which appears to have collected - 3 - huge amount from the depositors. The money was not repaid on the due dates in some cases only partially repaid at the end of the term. Various depositors therefore filed complaints of cheating and other related offences against the Company and its directors. The applicant was arrested in respect of one such complaint which was registered at C.R. No.283 of 2003 with Navpada Police Station. The applicant is in custody since 30th December 2007. Application for regular bail made by the applicant for the alleged offence registered under C.R. No.283 of 2003 was rejected by the Sessions Court. The applicant has thereafter approached this Court for bail. That matter is not presently before me. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that since the investigation has not been completed within the statutory period of 60 days, the applicant is filing separate application for regular bail in that crime before the concerned Sessions Court under section 167(2) of the Code. 5. The applicant apprehends that as and when he may be released on bail in respect of C.R. No.283/2003, he would be arrested serially in respect of each of the C.Rs. mentioned in Exhibit-B to this application. He therefore seeks anticipatory bail in respect of the said crimes. - 4 - 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that another director, namely Santosh Babu Pawaskar, has been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court (Coram: V.C. Daga, J.) vide its order dated 14th August 2007 passed in Criminal Application No.2455 of 2007. He further submitted that yet another director, viz. Dr.Umesh Marutisa Khade, has been granted bail/order of release by an order dated 24th November 2005 passed by a Division Bench (Coram: D.G. Deshpande & V.M. Kanade, JJ.) in Criminal Writ Petition No.2578 of 2005. He therefore submitted that the applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail on the ground of parity. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant had resigned as a director of the Company by his letter dated 25th February 2002. A copy of the said letter with a copy of the acknowledgment thereof are annexed at pages 29 and 30 of the compilation. He submitted that all the offences have been registered after the applicant resigned the directorship. In fact, the very crime numbers show that the offences have been registered in the years 2003 and 2004, that is long after the applicant resigned as a director of the Company. The applicant was not concerned with the refund of the money as on the due date the applicant was not the director of the Company and the applicant has not misappropriated any money and - 5 - except being promoter director he had no role to play. Whether the applicant is guilty of any offence and whether he had resigned the directorship before the offence was committed is a question of fact which would be decided at the trial. At this stage, suffice it to say that the case of the applicant is in no way worse than the case of the two directors Mr.Santosh Babu Pawaskar and Dr.Umesh Marutisa Khade, who have been granted bail/order of release by two orders of this Court. 8. Learned A.P.P. however submitted that the applicant was absconding and had even left the country and returned to India only after a red corner notice was issued. If the applicant is released on bail, he is likely to flee the country and therefore the request for bail should be rejected. No affidavit in reply has been filed by the State stating these facts on oath. However, in order to allay fears expressed by the learned A.P.P. that the applicant may flee the country and be not available for trial, strict conditions like surrender of passport can be imposed on the applicant. 9. It may be noted that the applicant is arrested on or about 30th December 2007 and is in custody for more than 2 months. As ordered by the Division Bench of this Court, investigation in respect of all the offences - 6 - has to be carried out by a single agency. The investigation agency so far must have carried out the investigation and in any event the applicant was available to the investigation agency for interrogation and investigation for sufficient period of time. Further presence of the applicant does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of custodial investigation. 10. In view of what is stated above, the applicant is entitled to bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER ORDER ORDER In the event of arrest of the applicant in any of the 27 crimes mentioned in Exhibit-B to Criminal Application No.53 of 2008, he shall be released on bail in each of the crimes on his executing personal bond of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall within 2 weeks hereof surrender his passport to the State C.I.D., Konkan Bhavan, Vashi. This order of bail shall becomel operative only after the applicant surrenders his passport, unless the same is already seized or is in possession of the police. - 7 - (b) The applicant shall report to the State C.I.D., Konkan Bhavan, once a month between 1st and 5th day of every month of the British calendar till filing of the charge sheet. (c) This order shall come to an end as soon as the charge sheet is filed whereupon the applicant may, if he so desires, apply to the court for regular bail. If such an application is made, the court shall consider it on its own merits without in any way being influenced by any of the observations made herein which are only prima facie. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)