Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief

Delhi High Court Grants Regular Bail to Accused in Multi-Crore Fraud Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Delhi High Court has granted regular bail to the accused in a high-profile fraud case involving allegations of misappropriation of funds amounting to approximately Rs. 8.5 crores. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee, has provided a respite to the applicant, who had filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The accused, Mr. Mukesh Bhardwaj, had been arrested in connection with FIR No. 136/2012 registered at the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police. While the applicant was not named in the FIR, he was apprehended based on his association with the financial company M/s. B.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. And M/s. Money Bhandar.

Justice Banerjee, in his judgment, observed, “Keeping the applicant behind bars for the prolonged period of trial would serve no purpose, especially in view of the fact that he is yet to be proven guilty.” The court further noted that the alleged nexus between M/s. Money Bhandar and M/s. B.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Had not been firmly established and that the trial in the matter was expected to be lengthy.

The judgment took into account the applicant’s clean record during his time in jail and emphasized that there was no occasion for him to languish behind bars while the trial was ongoing. The court, therefore, deemed it fit to grant regular bail to Mr. Mukesh Bhardwaj.

“While being inside the jail, the applicant has maintained a clean and unblemished record. Therefore, his continued detention is unnecessary, as the guilt has not been proven,” Justice Banerjee stated in the judgment. The court imposed certain conditions on the bail, including a personal bond of Rs. 1,50,000 and the submission of a passport (if possessed) to the Investigating Officer.

It is important to note that the observations made by the court are prima facie and do not reflect the final decision on the merits of the case. The judgment is expected to provide significant relief to the accused, whose trial is likely to take a substantial amount of time.

The legal fraternity has been closely following this case, given the magnitude of the alleged fraud and the complexities surrounding the involvement of multiple entities. The judgment sets a precedent for considering bail applications in similar cases where the accused’s role is not clearly established.

This judgment also serves as a reminder of the importance of due process and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in the Indian legal system.

Date of Decision: July 17, 2023

MUKESH BHARDWAJ vs   THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI   

Similar News