Bombay High Court
Mahesh Kisan Motewar vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 July, 2022
Bench: S. G. Mehare
1 BA.542-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO.542 OF 2022
MAHESH S/O KISAN MOTEWAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Suresh Tripathy h/f Mr. Jarare
Prasad D.
APP for Respondent-State : Mr. V. S. Badakh.
...
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
RESERVED ON : 04.07.2022
PRONOUNCED ON : 26.07.2022
ORDER :-
1. The applicant is seeking bail under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C. in Crime No.163 of 2018 registered by Police Station
Beed City for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406
read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 3 and 4 of
the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In
Financial Establishment) Act, 1999.
2. It has been alleged against the applicant that he has
formed one company Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd. The
applicant has promised to pay a double or triple return on the
amount invested by the investors. He has collected rupees Five
Crores from various investors. The applicant had changed the
2 BA.542-22.odt
name of his company. He closed his office at Sarda Capital at
Beed. The applicant is the Director of the said company. The
applicant cheated the investors under the false promise to
return the amount on the invested amount double or triple.
The applicant was arrested for the crime on 18.11.2021.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant Mr. Tripathy has
vehemently argued that the Beed Police Station had no
authority or power to investigate the crime against the
applicant and his company. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Public Interest Litigation had directed to make the
investigation against the transaction and business of the
applicant and his all companies. The investigation was
entrusted to the CBI. The CBI Bhubaneswar and West Bengal
did the entire investigation. The CBI attached the entire
property, bank accounts and assets of the applicant and his
company. Therefore, the Beed police had to refer the complaint
to CBI. The Beed Police Station did not obey the directions of
the Hon'ble Apex Court and acted in breach of the directions.
The CBI conducted the investigation for the same period
between 2010 to 2015, which covers the period of investment
of the applicant. The applicant has companies throughout the
country. The investigation was started before 2018. Beed
3 BA.542-22.odt
Police Station did not investigate till 2018. The FIR was
registered in the year 2018. Filing the charge sheet against the
applicant is double jeopardy. The Hon'ble Apex Court has
released the applicant in most of the crimes registered against
him. The CBI filed a comprehensive report in the year 2014
itself. The further detention of the applicant is not essential. He
has referred to the final report submitted by CBI Kolkata and
Bhubaneswar. He also referred to the orders of the Hon'ble
Apex Court enlarging the applicant on bail. Learned counsel
for the applicant also relied upon the bail orders passed at the
principal seat at Bombay. He relied on the said orders to
support his case that the applicant had been released on bail.
4. Learned APP has strongly opposed the application
contending that CBI Bhubaneswar has recently informed the
Superintendent of Police, EOW, Beed that CBI, EOB-VII has not
taken the issue of investors of any other States except investors
of Odisha. Therefore, the Beed Police Station has correctly
investigated the crime and filed a charge sheet against the
applicant. Since it is an independent investigation, there is no
question of double jeopardy. Around 1232 investors have been
cheated for worth rupees Twenty Crores. The police
interrogated the witnesses. There is no force in the contention
4 BA.542-22.odt
of the learned counsel for the applicant that the Beed Police
Station was supposed to transfer the investigation to CBI
Odisha/West Bengal. There were no specific directions of the
Hon'ble Apex Court as objected. The poor people have been
duped. The offences have been registered against the applicant
throughout the country. He may abscond; therefore, he cannot
be released on bail.
5. It is not in dispute that a thorough investigation was
done against the applicant by CBI Kolkata and Odisha, and the
crimes have been registered against the applicant. The CBI,
through its branches at Kolkata and Bhubaneswar, have
submitted the final report before the learned Special CBI,
Bhubaneswar. It has been alleged in the charge sheet that from
16.12.2013 to 01.08.2015, the applicant has illegally
transferred the amount of Rs.7,56,60,000/- to his different
accounts and misappropriated the money.
6. In the charge sheet filed by the CBI bearing
No.34/S/2014-CBI/KOL, CBI ACP, Bhubaneswar, in paragraph
No.16.5, it has been contended that the investigation reveals
that M/s Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd was formed
initially by the applicant and was engaged in collecting
deposits from general public under different schemes in the
5 BA.542-22.odt
garb of sale and purchase of live stock and approval of
statutory and regulatory authority like SEBI and RBI. SEBI
received the complaint and issued notice for preliminary
inquiry regarding unauthorized business activities of
Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd. with mala fide intention.
To avoid statutory and regularity compliances and to continue
collecting the deposits illegally from the public, the applicant
Mahesh with his associates formed a co-operative society in the
name and style of 'Samruddha Jeevan Multi Purpose Co-
operative Society Ltd.' with its head office at Pune which
stands registered as CRCS, New Delhi with effect from
08.06.2012. The said society, i.e. M/s Samruddha Jeevan Multi
Purpose Co-operative Society Ltd., was not authorized to
collect the deposits from the public other than its members.
7. In paragraph No.16.9 of the above charge sheet, it is also
contended that the area of operation of proposed co-operative
society was initially confined to the State of Maharashtra,
Karnataka, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, which was
subsequently extended to 17 States. In paragraph No.16.10, it
is contended that the investigation reveals that during the said
period of legal actions initiated against M/s Samruddha Jeevan
Foods India Ltd. by SEBI, the offices and branches of M/s
6 BA.542-22.odt
Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd. continued collecting
deposits from public, initially through M/s Prosperity Agro
India Ltd., Pune and thereafter through M/s Samruddha
Jeevan Multi Purpose Co-operative Society Ltd. The investors
who were depositing under different plans i.e. single
installment plan, monthly deposit etc. in Samruddha Jeevan
Foods India Ltd. continued to deposits their regular
installments with Samruddha Jeevan Multi State Multi Purpose
Co-operative Society Ltd. In the said charge sheet, repeatedly
there is a reference of M/s Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd.
and the depositors were continue to deposit the money with
the said company though the SEBI had initiated the inquiry
agianst the said company. It has been transpired in the said
investigation that the present applicant has misappropriated
Rs.9,46,40,761/-.
8. On the basis of what has been alleged in the said charge
sheet, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Tripathy has
vehemently argued that the present office registered at Beed
has been covered in the said inquiry.
9. The learned counsel for the applicant has invited the
attention of this Court to the orders passed by the Hon'ble
Apex Court releasing the applicant on bail. By order dated
7 BA.542-22.odt
23.04.2019, the Hon'ble Apex Court released the applicant on
bail in a charge sheet filed by CBI. He has referred to the order
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to
Appeal (Criminal) No.1564 of 2019 (Arising out of impugned
final judgment and order dated 29.01.2019 in BLAPL No.4828
of 2018 passed by High Court of Orissa at Cuttack) in the case
of Mahesh Kisan Motewar Vs. Republic of India (CBI) with SLP
(Criminal) No.1596 of 2019 (II-B) dated 23.04.2019. It has
been observed in the said order in paragraphs Nos.2, 3 and 4
as follows :
" When the petitioner knocked at the doors of the High
Court insofar as bail was concerned qua a second chargesheet,
filed on 19.07.2018, under the same provisions of the Indian
Penal Code and the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes
(Banning) Act, 1978, with regard to the petitioner's role in a
group company called Samruddha Jeevan Multi State Multi
Purpose Co-operative Society Ltd., the High Court turned down
bail stating that the bail granted insofar as the first case was
concerned, was not a precedent which bound the High Court
under Article 141 of the Constitution of India.
No doubt, the High Court is right that the bail order
cannot be held to be a precedent because, in any case, it SLP
(Crl.) No. 1564/2019 etc. lays down no law, but yet the High
Court ought to have considered that the two chargesheets that
have been filed are with regard to group companies where the
petitioner is alleged to be the mastermind in which common
evidence will be given.
8 BA.542-22.odt
This being the case, we enlarge the petitioner on bail
insofar as the second charge sheet case is concerned subject to
the conditions to be laid down by the trial Court.
Since the investigation is on-going, the petitioner will
cooperate with the investigation whenever required.
The special leave petitions stand disposed of."
10. The learned counsel for the applicant has referred to the
order in Criminal Bail Application No.1734 of 2019 dated
23.08.2019 and pointed out the reproduced paragraph Nos.34
and 34-B of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 09.05.2014 in Writ
Petition (Civil) No.401 of 2013 and connected petitions. Those
paragraphs are reproduced for reference. The Hon'ble Apex
Court has directed the investigation of all cases registered
against 44 companies mentioned in its order dated 26.03.2014.
The CBI was also permitted to investigate all cases in which the
charge sheets had already been filed. The liberty was also
granted to the Joint Director, CBI, in charge of the State of
West Bengal and Odisha, to seek further directions in relation
to the transfer of any other case or cases that may require to be
transferred for investigation to the CBI for a full and effective
investigation into the scam. The applicant's company
Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd., was undisputedly among
one of those 44 companies. Therefore, there appears to be a
substance in the submission of learned counsel Mr. Tripathy
9 BA.542-22.odt
that the CBI was investigating the allegations of such
investments and misappropriation done through and in the
name of Samruddha Jeevan Foods India Ltd. In the light of
these facts, it can safely be said that the CBI has investigated
the allegations made in the FIR registered with Beed Police
Station.
11. In view of the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court releasing
the applicant in the charge sheets filed by CBI and respectfully
taking the same view since the applicant had been released on
bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court. This Court is inclined to release
the applicant on bail. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant Mahesh Kisan Motewar be released
on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with one solvent surety of
the like amount in Crime No.163 of 2018
registered by Police Station Beed City, District
Beed, on the following conditions :
(a) He shall not tamper with the prosecution
witnesses.
(b) He shall not interfere with the investigation.
10 BA.542-22.odt
(c) He shall attend the Police Station as and
when called by the police on written notice.
(S. G. MEHARE, J.)
...
vmk/-
