HC refuses pre-arrest bail to IAS officer booked in investment scam

Bombay HC rejects pre-arrest bail pleas of IAS officer Ashutosh Kumar Sahay and his co-accused, Sanjay Pandey, in an investment scam case.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court recently rejected the pre-arrest bail plea of Ashutosh Kumar Sahay, a 1992 batch Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer, booked for allegedly defrauding several people of crores of rupees on the pretext of doubling their investment within a year in slum rehabilitation schemes and other construction projects across the city.

The court also rejected the pre-arrest bail plea of his co-accused, Sanjay Pandey, but granted anticipatory bail to Sahay’s wife, Monica Sahay (Unsplash/Representative)

The court also rejected the pre-arrest bail plea of his co-accused, Sanjay Pandey, but granted anticipatory bail to Sahay’s wife, Monica Sahay, also booked in the investment scam.

“Custodial interrogation of the applicants, Ashutosh Kumar and Sanjay Pandey appears to be indispensable for a fair and effective investigation, as there is prima facie evidence to indicate their involvement in the fraud,” said a single judge bench of justice NJ Jamadar. “At this stage, it would be hazardous to throw the version of the first informant and the investors overboard,” the judge added.

Sahay, who is currently posted as the Regional Director of the Plastics Export Promotion Council, was booked, along with three others, in July this year by the Versova police for allegedly scamming several investors of nearly ₹5.5 crore in the name of investing in several MHADA schemes and construction projects across the city.

As per the aggrieved parties, Sahay has since 2017 used his power and position to induce them to invest a large sum of money, promising a high return within a year. Later, when the amounts were not returned as promised, suspicion arose among the investors. Inquiries revealed that Sahay had deceived them; the documents shown to induce them to part with the amounts were forged and fabricated, leading to the registration of the FIR.

During the hearing on his pre-arrest bail plea, Sahay’s counsel advocate, Ashok Bhatia, submitted that the allegations were improbable as the entire sum, except an amount of ₹50,000, was said to be paid in cash. Moreover, there was an inordinate delay in registering the FIR as the alleged crime took place during 2017–2018, and therefore the applicant deserved to be protected by granting him anticipatory bail.

An assistant prosecutor opposed the plea, contending that there was sufficient evidence, including statements of witnesses, which support the claim of the first informant. Furthermore, six other crimes are registered against Sahay and two crimes each against Monica and Pandey, disentitling them of any reliefs, he added.

The court, finding merit in the arguments of the prosecutor, refused to grant any relief to Sahay and his co-accused, Pandey, observing that their custodial interrogation was necessary for the proper investigation of the case.