If the involvement is of a large sum, we are not inclined to grant bail: SC

If the involvement is of a large sum, we are not inclined to grant bail: SC

On January 23, the Supreme Court's division bench, which was presided over by Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh, noted that it is hesitant to issue bail in instances involving economic violations, particularly where numerous depositors have been duped.

"Suppose, you've taken away money from thousands of people, swindled. And you say, please grant him anticipatory bail, regardless of the plight of the victims. Maybe, families don't have money with them. They can't send their kids to school. They have to beg, borrow and steal from others. That's not acceptable”, the bench highlighted.

“I had offered to deposit 9 lakhs in the lower court”, Speaking on behalf of the petitioner, senior attorney R. Basant informed the court. On Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, he also relied.

“Will this be an economic offence or not?”, After reading the ruling, the Bench questioned. 

Basant responded that it is a violation of Section 420 (Cheating) of the Indian Penal Code.

“Taking money from depositors, will it be an economic offense under the RBI Act or the SEBI Act,?”, The Bench asked more questions. 

Basant responded that not every crime involving money is a financial crime. 

The Court stated that it would only release someone on bail if the "amount" was not excessive. 

After giving notice in the matter, the Bench instructed the petitioner to pay the money with the Trial Court within two weeks. The Court then noted that the petitioner will be granted interim bail with the condition that he appears before the Trial Court.

"Till the next date of hearing, subject to the petitioner appearing before the Trial Court, he shall be released on interim bail on terms and conditions to be fixed by the Trial Court."

The following court date is February 27. 

A motion for anticipatory bail filed by one Samsul Alam Khan was being heard by the Bench.

Case title: Samsul Alam Khan Amit Sharma Vs Union Of India 
Citation: Slp(Crl) No. 12626/2022

Read the order: click on this tab/link

Appearance of the Advocates:-

For Petitioner(s)
Mr. S.R. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sushant Kumar Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Mangal Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Jaidev Yadav, Adv.
Prithvi Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Lomes, Adv.
Mr. Ankur Yadav, AOR
Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jaswant M., Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, AOR

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy