TIP Essential When Identity Based On Belated 'Alias' Claims; Conviction Can't Rest On Improved Witness Testimonies: Supreme Court Conviction Based On Flawed Identification Cannot Be Sustained In Law: Supreme Court Acquits Sri Lankan National In UAPA Case Penalty For Misdeclaration Of Power Capacity Is Strict Liability; No Need To Prove Intent Or 'Gaming': Supreme Court Authority To Appoint Includes Power To Dismiss; Visitor Can Terminate 'First Registrar' Under Transitional Provisions: Supreme Court State Cannot Use Delay Or Contractual Clauses To Deny Statutory Compensation For Land Acquisition: Supreme Court State As Model Employer Cannot Deny Regularization Benefits To Workers Due To Its Own Clerical Lapses: Supreme Court Section 106 Evidence Act | Husband’s Failure To Explain Wife’s Unnatural Death In Matrimonial Home Completes Chain Of Circumstances: Supreme Court Tender Condition For Out-Of-State Bidders To Submit EMD Via Demand Draft Not Mandatory If Clause Uses 'May': Supreme Court Affidavit Is Not 'Evidence' Under Section 3 Of Evidence Act Unless Court Orders Its Use Under Order XIX CPC: Supreme Court Exclusion Of Natural Heirs Not A 'Suspicious Circumstance' To Invalidate Will If Testator Provides Reason: Supreme Court 18-Year-Old Rendered 100% Disabled Entitled To Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects And Dignity: Punjab & Haryana HC Right To Life Under Article 21 Prioritizes Preservation Of Mother's Life Over Reproductive Autonomy If Termination Poses Fatal Risk: J&K High Court Director’s Involvement In Company Affairs A Disputed Fact; High Court Cannot Conduct ‘Mini-Trial’ To Quash Section 138 NI Act Complaint: Punjab & Haryana HC Abuse Of Process: Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Against Lawyer & Ex-Police Chief Sanjay Pandey; Says Complaints Motivated By Vengeance Magistrate Not Bound To Order FIR In Every Case Under Section 175(3) BNSS If Complainant Possesses All Evidence: Allahabad High Court High Court Can Initiate Suo Motu Inquiry Against Judicial Officers Based On Information; Sworn Affidavit Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Lack Of Videography, Independent Witnesses During Contraband Seizure Relevant Factors For Granting Bail Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Innocence is Presumed Until Proven Guilty; Bail Not to be Denied in Economic Offences: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Embezzlement Case Involving Fake Websites and Cryptocurrency

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, presided over by Justice Sushil Kukreja, has granted bail to the accused in a significant case involving economic offenses related to fraudulent investment schemes and the creation of fake websites. The decision in Cr. MP (M) No. 415 of 2024 along with Cr. MPs (M) No. 603 & 613/2024 was pronounced, emphasizing the principle that “every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty.”

The petitioners, Amit Pradeep Singh and others, were charged under Sections 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, along with the Himachal Pradesh Protection of Interests of Depositors Act, 1999, and the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. They sought bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, following their arrest connected to FIR No. 120/2023.

The case revolved around the operation of fake websites and virtual currency schemes, with allegations that the accused had embezzled a significant amount of money. The prosecution alleged that the accused used these websites to dupe investors, promising doubled returns on investments. The defense argued for bail on the grounds that the investigation was complete and the prolonged incarceration of the accused served no purpose.

Justice Kukreja delved into the principles governing the grant of bail in economic offenses, citing various precedents including Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Manoranjana Sinh alias Gupta Vs. CBI. The Court highlighted that bail is a rule and jail an exception, emphasizing the presumption of innocence. The decision was shaped by considering the gravity of the offense, the completion of the investigation, and the filing of the chargesheet, coupled with the unlikelihood of an immediate trial.

The Court granted bail to the petitioners, subject to stringent conditions such as personal bonds, sureties, mandatory appearances, restrictions on engaging in cryptocurrency business, property restrictions, and surrender of passports. The Court stated, “It is neither punitive nor preventive, but to secure the presence of the accused at the trial.”

Date of Decision: April 09, 2024.

Amit Pradeep Singh and Others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh,

Latest Legal News