Bombay HC refuses pre-arrest bail to man accused of duping friend of ₹87 lakh

The accused had assured the complainant that he could help her solve her domestic problems by performing religious rituals through a priest

The Bombay high court (HC) has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man who allegedly duped his close acquaintance of Rs87 lakh on the assurance that he could help her solve her matrimonial issues and help in curing her husband’s health problems by performing religious rituals through a priest.

The court also noted that there was no evidence to support the man’s claim that he had repaid ₹60 lakh to the complainant. (HT FILE)

As the problems did not subside, the woman lodged a complaint against him under the relevant sections of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 (Black Magic Act).

The court held that as the man had intentionally swindled the woman and he was unable to substantiate his claims of repaying her or give her the whereabouts of the priest, his custodial interrogation was required, and rejected his application.

A single-judge bench of justice Sandeep K Shinde, while hearing the anticipatory bail application of Burzin Daruwalla was informed by his advocate Yogesh Dalvi that his client was booked by Ambernath police station under sections 406 (breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as under the provisions of the Black Magic Act.

According to the complaint, the woman had paid ₹10.9 lakh in 2015 to Daruwalla and also loaned him ₹76.38 lakh from 2015- 2019. In return Daruwalla had promised to perform rituals and gave finger rings to her, assuring that on wearing them, her problems would be solved.

The case registered at Ambernath police station further states that Daruwalla kept demanding more money and told the complainant that the rituals were not making a difference as she was follow not following the norms.

However, the woman did not buy the claims and asked Daruwalla to return the money. When he refused to do so, she lodged a complaint against him.

After hearing the submissions and perusing the evidence placed before it – including messages between Daruwalla and the woman– the court noted, “The messages over a period of three-four years clearly suggest that the applicant had dishonestly inducted the complainant to part with huge money on the pretext of performing puja/rituals to resolve her family issues. The messages clearly suggest that the applicant knew well since inception that the promise made by him was false.” The court also noted that there was no evidence to support the man’s claim that he had repaid ₹60 lakh to the complainant.

In light of the above submissions, justice Shinde ordered, “In my view, custodial interrogation of the applicant cannot be denied to the prosecution. Anticipatory bail application is, therefore, rejected.”