Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction When Death Is Caused by an Unforeseeable Forest Fire, Criminal Prosecution Cannot Be Sustained Without Proof of Rashness, Negligence, or Knowledge: Supreme Court Proof of Accident Alone is Not Enough – Claimants Must Prove Involvement of Offending Vehicle Under Section 166 MV Act: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal for Compensation in Fatal Road Accident Case Income Tax | Search Means Search, Not ‘Other Person’: Section 153C Collapses When the Assessee Himself Is Searched: Karnataka High Court Draws a Clear Red Line License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD"

Bombay High Court Denies Suspension of Sentence for Convicted Financial Fraudsters

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


"The actions of the accused have significantly undermined public trust in financial institutions," says Court

In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court denied applications for the suspension of sentences and bail for several individuals convicted of financial fraud under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act) and various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The convicts, including Hasan Amir Raje, Mahesh Baban Zaware, Anup Pravin Parekh, and others, were found guilty of serious offences involving misappropriation and fraud in the Sampada Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Limited, a financial institution in Ahmednagar.

The Sampada Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Limited, a cooperative financial institution, was registered in 2001 and had over 25,820 depositors. Following a detailed audit by PW20, a Chartered Accountant, significant discrepancies were found, revealing misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs. 13,28,55,667. Consequently, criminal proceedings were initiated, and the accused were charged with offences under Sections 177, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC, as well as Section 3 of the MPID Act.

The court underscored the severity of economic offences, likening them to grave crimes due to their impact on society and public trust. "Economic offences constitute a serious threat to the financial stability of institutions and the economy at large," the bench observed.

Each accused played a distinct role in the fraud, ranging from board members to managing committee members and borrowers. The court noted that the misappropriation involved deliberate circumvention of rules, with some accused benefiting directly or indirectly from the fraudulent loans.

The court highlighted the substantial evidence presented during the trial, which established the involvement of the accused in the fraud. Given the magnitude of the crime and its societal impact, the court found no justification for suspending the sentences or granting bail.

The judgment emphasized that the power to suspend sentences under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) should be exercised judiciously and only in cases where there is a strong likelihood of the conviction being overturned on appeal. "Given the extensive evidence and the gravity of the offences, it is not a fit case for suspension of sentence or grant of bail," the court stated.

Justice Abhay S. Waghwase remarked, "The actions of the accused have significantly undermined public trust in financial institutions. The magnitude of the fraud necessitates a stringent approach to uphold the rule of law and deter similar offences in the future."

The denial of suspension of sentence and bail in this case reflects the judiciary's commitment to addressing serious economic offences with the gravity they deserve. By rejecting the applications, the court reaffirmed the importance of maintaining public trust in financial institutions and ensuring that those who engage in large-scale financial fraud are held accountable.

 

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024

Hasan Amir Raje vs The State of Maharashtra

Latest Legal News